PDA

View Full Version : The Hunger Games


1Powerslave
03-16-2012, 09:57 PM
A friend recommended me to read The Hunger Games. I finished all three books in a few days. An easy read, but great idea and setting, great suspense, and while the plot and characters where convoluted at times, it was interesting and moving enough to balance it up. Overall a great read. I recommend!

It will nice to see the movie next week. And I saw that there will be four movies made out of the trilogy. I hope they change the ending of book three cause it wasn't very good. And maybe Katniss will come off a little less heartless, and less mental dithering and recrimination. Peeta could also use a little Hollywood lovin'. Just to round them off a bit. ;)

Also, I found this awesome little piece of fan movie:

HUNGER GAMES: THE SECOND QUARTER QUELL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mUjssn86h4 (view in HD of course)
A ten minute fan movie of Haymitch time in the Arena. It's a very good, high quality, production. And it had good acting the little there was.

WHY HASN*T THERE BEEN FAN MOVIES LIKE THIS FOR WOT??? :)

Davian93
03-16-2012, 10:01 PM
The ending is what makes it a good series IMHO.

Otherwise it would have been a light teen love interest book.

1Powerslave
03-16-2012, 10:12 PM
What part of the ending?

I found it a bit anticlimatic (?) that Katniss had no part in bringing down Pres. Snow. And the whole killing children to send Katniss over the edge, I don't know, it just felt off. Must've been easier ways to get rid of her etc. And then Katniss associating Gale with those weapons that killed her sister, yada yada. And why she decided for Peeta in the end, nah, should've been better.

Terez
03-17-2012, 12:49 AM
When I read about the plot, it reminded me of Stephen King's "The Long Walk", written as Bachman. So I googled it to see if anyone else agreed. Turns out King actually reviewed the book (http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,20419951_20223443,00.html). Overall it's a strange review, and it seems he's only plugging it because he appreciated the dark nature of it. And of course...
...readers of Battle Royale (by Koushun Takami), The Running Man, or The Long Walk (those latter two by some guy named Bachman) will quickly realize they have visited these TV badlands before.

Frenzy
03-17-2012, 02:23 AM
Simpsons did it!!

Ishara
03-17-2012, 04:37 PM
What part of the ending?

I found it a bit anticlimatic (?) that Katniss had no part in bringing down Pres. Snow. And the whole killing children to send Katniss over the edge, I don't know, it just felt off. Must've been easier ways to get rid of her etc. And then Katniss associating Gale with those weapons that killed her sister, yada yada. And why she decided for Peeta in the end, nah, should've been better.

Ah, but:
First, the children were killed by District 13 to discredit Snow, not to send Katniss over the edge. Prim was just collateral damage that helped because she went quietly, which was the concern of District 13 the whole time - how to get rid of her after they had finished using her.

Second, Gale had everything to do with the weapons that killed the kids, and Prim. He *was* the wrong choice for Katniss if she wanted to be able to move on and forget the war. Peeta was the right choice - he adored her in spite of the fact that he knew her flaws. He tempered them - Gale made them worse and brought out the worst in her.

I'll agree with Dav - the ending of the series is what elevated it above the rest of mediocre YF. It's not tidy, it's not necessarily the one people want in their hearts, but it's the *right* ending.

1Powerslave
03-18-2012, 12:08 AM
Ah, but:
First, the children were killed by District 13 to discredit Snow, not to send Katniss over the edge. Prim was just collateral damage that helped because she went quietly, which was the concern of District 13 the whole time - how to get rid of her after they had finished using her.

Second, Gale had everything to do with the weapons that killed the kids, and Prim. He *was* the wrong choice for Katniss if she wanted to be able to move on and forget the war. Peeta was the right choice - he adored her in spite of the fact that he knew her flaws. He tempered them - Gale made them worse and brought out the worst in her.

I'll agree with Dav - the ending of the series is what elevated it above the rest of mediocre YF. It's not tidy, it's not necessarily the one people want in their hearts, but it's the *right* ending.
Well, speaking of mediocre YF.

I think that Katniss killing the leader of 13 in front of everyone in a temper tantrum and then getting off the hook completely is just that. No, that's actually worse than mediocre.

Discredit Snow, okay, not really necessary since they were ten minutes away from arresting him, but maybe it was needed for the Capital citizens to get more on the rebels side.

Sure, Gale had the idea for the weapons that killed Prim, but why the need to make the association? There was a lot of what ifs, whining, self recriminations and wrong associations made by Katniss.

I'll agree that now that Gale made a career in the army he would forever remind her of the war, iff, Peeta would forever remind her of the Hunger Games... But yea, Gale was way more aggressive and Peeta more soft. I guess I have a problem buying into Peeta loving Katniss at all just because I can't identify with the whole loving from afar from the age of five etc. She really gave him no reason to love her. She was so cold and emotionless most of the time, towards him.

I went through the books really fast, I can't remember when Katniss really became in love with any of the boys. She spent most of the books emotionless denying or not knowing just what she felt. When was the first time she felt real love for Peeta for instance?

Having no bearing at all on this discussion, just a random fun fact, I just got home from a great date with a brazilian girl. Talk about booty, and talk about knowing how to shake it! :)

Ishara
03-18-2012, 12:37 PM
Well, speaking of mediocre YF.

I think that Katniss killing the leader of 13 in front of everyone in a temper tantrum and then getting off the hook completely is just that. No, that's actually worse than mediocre.

Discredit Snow, okay, not really necessary since they were ten minutes away from arresting him, but maybe it was needed for the Capital citizens to get more on the rebels side.

Sure, Gale had the idea for the weapons that killed Prim, but why the need to make the association? There was a lot of what ifs, whining, self recriminations and wrong associations made by Katniss.

I'll agree that now that Gale made a career in the army he would forever remind her of the war, iff, Peeta would forever remind her of the Hunger Games... But yea, Gale was way more aggressive and Peeta more soft. I guess I have a problem buying into Peeta loving Katniss at all just because I can't identify with the whole loving from afar from the age of five etc. She really gave him no reason to love her. She was so cold and emotionless most of the time, towards him.

I went through the books really fast, I can't remember when Katniss really became in love with any of the boys. She spent most of the books emotionless denying or not knowing just what she felt. When was the first time she felt real love for Peeta for instance?

Having no bearing at all on this discussion, just a random fun fact, I just got home from a great date with a brazilian girl. Talk about booty, and talk about knowing how to shake it! :)

Dude, that's awesome. Brazilian girls are wicked hot. :)

Terez
03-18-2012, 01:33 PM
I lived with a Brazilian girl briefly a couple of years ago. She wasn't particularly hot—she had to soak her toenails in water for an hour before she could cut them—but she told me all about Brazil.

Zaela Sedai
03-18-2012, 02:06 PM
I enjoyed the books, and definitely felt the end end is what made it a great series in general. Any book that doesn't allow me to put it down = great read.


They should be good movie material, I've heard that the Hunger Games is actually a *GOOD* movie unlike others, so we shall see.

Terez
03-18-2012, 02:09 PM
I actually downloaded the first one, and tried to read it, but the style annoyed me greatly. I remember it was something to do with the POV.

1Powerslave
03-18-2012, 04:48 PM
Thanks, Ish. Wicked hot, hehe.

I lived with a Brazilian girl briefly a couple of years ago. She wasn't particularly hotóshe had to soak her toenails in water for an hour before she could cut themóbut she told me all about Brazil.
I didn't get a good look at her toe nails, though she did complain about her feet hurting from walking in those shoes...
What did she tell you about Brazil? And if it was a lot, feel free to skip to the parts I'd be interested in hearing about. :)

1Powerslave
03-18-2012, 04:55 PM
I enjoyed the books, and definitely felt the end end is what made it a great series in general. Any book that doesn't allow me to put it down = great read.
Agree, books that can't be put down, basically = good books. Same goes for books that have scenes that move me.

I actually downloaded the first one, and tried to read it, but the style annoyed me greatly. I remember it was something to do with the POV.I got used to the style in just a few pages, didn't bother me at all.

yks 6nnetu hing
03-19-2012, 04:18 AM
I concur with those who liked the ending. Sure, the series is aimed at young adults (which apparently means 12 and up) and a certain amount of angst is to be expected. But I'm glad that

that
1) the angst of the protagonist is not self-righteous. Instead her self-image is much harsher than other poeple see her.
2) the romantic blah-di-blah takes a back seat when it comes to Katniss' sister.
3) she ends up with the Good Guy. This is a particularly important point if you look at the whole Twilight horror and glorification of Dominant Bad Guys and Girls Who Can't Live Without Said Dominant Bad Guys

Davian93
03-19-2012, 07:37 AM
Two things about Katniss that make her an infinitely better role model than Bella:


1. She can and will live/survive on her own as a single woman.
2. Neither of her options is an abusive, stalkerish, rapey sparkling fvcking vampire.

Cortar
03-22-2012, 04:06 PM
Oh boy... Well here are my 2-cents:

1) Old, stale plot. I don't mind people revisiting old ideas, but if you don't introduce something fresh then whats the point?

2) Unbelievable world building. Her science and concepts of politics is laughable at best. "Jets can't fly anymore because the atmosphere was destroyed by nukes" lolwhat? The land in her books is so bland; here is the food making place, here is the mining place, etc. The real world isn't like this at all....

3) Twilight.
I am sick and tired of teenage love triangles.

4)Stupid ending. Oh wait, he told me that he wouldn't lie! Gasp I better believe that and distrust everyone else!

5) Bad writing. Sorry but I find it tiring reading stuff written for 8 year olds.

Jokeslayer
03-22-2012, 05:32 PM
I read the first one, didn't really see what the fuss was about. I remember feeling that all Katniss's interesting decisions were taken away from her by the plot (like her friendship with whatever that girl was called - Rue, I think - where she could have had to make a difficult decision but instead the plot handily solved the problem for her). The world building was baaad, but I ignored that because it doesn't really matter once they're in the Games. I started the second one but got bored after about 20 pages and never went back.

Ishara
03-22-2012, 09:26 PM
I'm not blacking out the whole post. Just don't read it if you haven't read all three, mmmkay?









Truthfully, I felt that worlds inside the Arena(s) were fabulous. Where Collins suffered is in Book Three - outside of the Arena and in the Capitol.

I don't like the concept of calling HG a love triangle - it's not. It's two choices, two lifestyles, two guys who love her in very different ways who bring out different things in her. It's not all like Twilight.

Cortar
03-23-2012, 12:06 AM
Truthfully, I felt that worlds inside the Arena(s) were fabulous. Where Collins suffered is in Book Three - outside of the Arena and in the Capitol. I can agree there, but thats the entire point of the book, so it kinda spoils everything

(we shouldn't have to black anything out, if you haven't read the books or don't want to get spoiled then don't enter a thread about it lol)


I don't like the concept of calling HG a love triangle - it's not. It's two choices, two lifestyles, two guys who love her in very different ways who bring out different things in her. It's not all like Twilight.

ummm that is EXACTLY like Twilight. Bella has a choice, two lifestyles, two guys who love her in very different ways who bring out different things in her.

Ishara
03-23-2012, 07:32 AM
I can't believe I'm about to get into this (for a host of reasons...)

Twilight's romantic triangle was one that was ultimately designed to cater to the hearts of 12-year old girls everywhere. It's based of the premise that Bella cannot survive without making her choice - that her future depends on one of the guys. And, in fact, her choice is never her choice. It's always "fated." Meyer then turns it into this nasty tetrahedron of shame by having one side of the triangle fall in love with the child of the other two sides, so as to remove all fallout from the non-triangle relationship. Bella was always in love with Edward, and was very clear to Jake that it would always be Edward, whether he wanted her or not. The only thing that made it a triangle was Jake's persistent emands that she think again. All in all, a pathetic teen love story.

With the Hunger Games, there are absolutely no romantic undertones to the relationship between Katniss and Gale,in fact they are referred to - more than once - as almost like brother and sister, in appearance and demeanor. While we're told that Peeta has long loved Katniss from afar, she felt nothing but frustration that he was chosen as the other Tribute. Not because she liked him one way or the other, but because she felt she owed him, and that would affect her ability to survive at all costs. They only begin to manufacture their fake a romantic interest when it becomes clear that it is the only way they can capture the interest of the Capital, and she perpetuates it when she knows she can procure outside aid in the Arena as a result of that interest - people want to see a romance, and she gave it to them to make sure that Peeta got the medicine he needed. She was forced to continue the charade - and he was caught up in it - as part of being a successful Tribute. It was never real in her mind. So far, no triangle.

While Gale may have become the focus of attention for her in Catching Fire, it was partly because he was her tie-in to her old life, in her old home and partly because she couldn't have him - she wasn't allowed to choose freely, even if she wanted to (which I'm not convinced she did). Ultimately, I'm convinced she felt great affection for both boys, and that each boy had his own feelings for her (Peeta of devotion and Gale of possession), but she could have survived - and proved that could - without either one of them. She chose Peeta because of what he saw in her spite of her terrible flaws (and she has them), and because he brought to her qualities she didn't have, but still valued.

Does that clarify?

Davian93
03-23-2012, 08:22 AM
The land in her books is so bland; here is the food making place, here is the mining place, etc. The real world isn't like this at all....


Iowa and West Virginia are on the phone and would like to speak to you...

SauceyBlueConfetti
03-23-2012, 02:15 PM
2) Unbelievable world building. Her science and concepts of politics is laughable at best. "Jets can't fly anymore because the atmosphere was destroyed by nukes" lolwhat? The land in her books is so bland; here is the food making place, here is the mining place, etc. The real world isn't like this at all....

I liked it. I didn't go in expecting literature, I knew in advance it was Young Adult material. If you knew that, why did you bother?

Regarding the world building....ummmm, that is kind of the POINT of the book. She believes (as do most others) what they have been told, what they see on government controlled TV. The Districts don't mix because that could promote discussion, disagreement, dissent, revolt. The folks in charge don't like the bartering, they don't like peons learning to do other things, they won't allow them to leave their designated areas. You, Katniss, will grow up to work in the mines. Because that is ALL we will allow. If you notice, many of the folks who initiate and plan the revolt are either those who HAVE traveled and seen other areas/abuses (helllllo Haymitch), have seen inequities firsthand, or are all too aware of the actual evils from firsthand knowledge(hellllo Cinna).

I think you missed most, if not all, of the points of the books.

I wasn't keen on the ending at first (the Prim part in particular), but it grew on me. The more I have thought on the books, the more I like them.

Twilight? I couldn't read past halfway in the first book and the first movie was the only one I saw. The lead actress was sooooooo bland that I almost fell asleep. I am Team Guy Who Almost Killed Bella with the Truck.

1Powerslave
03-23-2012, 08:02 PM
Saw the movie a couple of hours ago. Wow it sucked. A complete disaster. My advice is don't waste your time and money on the movie. :(

Davian93
03-23-2012, 09:06 PM
Saw the movie a couple of hours ago. Wow it sucked. A complete disaster. My advice is don't waste your time and money on the movie. :(

Really? That bad?

1Powerslave
03-24-2012, 06:15 AM
Really? That bad?
Yes. If the books are YF the movie is child fantasy. They've nerfed every moment of action in the books and lost the cruel dystopian feel of the books. No blood at all, no fighting scenes (it's all blurred, no fighting koreography and they cut away in the middle of interesting scenes instead of exploring them completely). My friends and I all agreed that it was really bad and a waste.

It's what happens when you take an interesting idea or book and try to adapt it so that seven year olds can watch it as well.

SauceyBlueConfetti
03-24-2012, 12:33 PM
My friends and I all agreed that it was really bad and a waste.

Sad faces all around. You are the second person this morning I know who has given the big thumbs down. I was extremely hopeful for this movie. :(

Davian93
03-24-2012, 09:24 PM
Yes. If the books are YF the movie is child fantasy. They've nerfed every moment of action in the books and lost the cruel dystopian feel of the books. No blood at all, no fighting scenes (it's all blurred, no fighting koreography and they cut away in the middle of interesting scenes instead of exploring them completely). My friends and I all agreed that it was really bad and a waste.

It's what happens when you take an interesting idea or book and try to adapt it so that seven year olds can watch it as well.

Weak.

Brita
03-25-2012, 08:58 AM
Yes. If the books are YF the movie is child fantasy. They've nerfed every moment of action in the books and lost the cruel dystopian feel of the books. No blood at all, no fighting scenes (it's all blurred, no fighting koreography and they cut away in the middle of interesting scenes instead of exploring them completely). My friends and I all agreed that it was really bad and a waste.

It's what happens when you take an interesting idea or book and try to adapt it so that seven year olds can watch it as well.

I can only hope that you have now lowered my expectations to the extent that I may now be pleasantly surprised that it isn't as horrible as I imagined....

1Powerslave
03-25-2012, 09:33 AM
Sad faces all around. You are the second person this morning I know who has given the big thumbs down. I was extremely hopeful for this movie. :(
I was hopeful too. :/

We did agree that it's good to have seen the movie, so we wont be wondering if it really was worthwhile...

I can only hope that you have now lowered my expectations to the extent that I may now be pleasantly surprised that it isn't as horrible as I imagined....
I hope that too! Maybe some people will like it. It will be interesting to see everyone's take on it, if people can report in here right after they've seen the movie.

eht slat meit
03-25-2012, 10:49 PM
Yes. If the books are YF the movie is child fantasy. They've nerfed every moment of action in the books and lost the cruel dystopian feel of the books. No blood at all, no fighting scenes (it's all blurred, no fighting koreography and they cut away in the middle of interesting scenes instead of exploring them completely). My friends and I all agreed that it was really bad and a waste.

It's what happens when you take an interesting idea or book and try to adapt it so that seven year olds can watch it as well.

The books were never supposed to be Battle Royale, and honestly, they're better for not being so grotesque. Haven't seen the movie yet, but you have to realize that there's a fine line to be tread if you don't want the movie to be seen in the same light as BR.

Because it only takes one of those 12 year old children being killed as brutally as it is hinted at in the books to turn the movie into something much uglier and nastier, and certainly not anything that would be considered appropriate to youth in this country.

yks 6nnetu hing
03-26-2012, 02:28 AM
The books were never supposed to be Battle Royale, and honestly, they're better for not being so grotesque. Haven't seen the movie yet, but you have to realize that there's a fine line to be tread if you don't want the movie to be seen in the same light as BR.

Because it only takes one of those 12 year old children being killed as brutally as it is hinted at in the books to turn the movie into something much uglier and nastier, and certainly not anything that would be considered appropriate to youth in this country.

I haven't seen the movie yet but I kind of agree with this sentiment. Also, I tend to get severely nauseated and/or dizzy with too much gore so considering that I want to see the movie, I'm glad they didn't go too graphic.

Terez
03-26-2012, 03:50 AM
I was watching the HP movies recently and I noticed they did the same thing. It doesn't bother me much; I don't watch movies for gore.

Brita
03-26-2012, 11:41 AM
I saw it, and I liked it. For the most part. My biggest issue wasn't the lack of gore- they didn't leave out any death, they just didn't show it in detail, which is fine by me. I am a little disappointed in some things that were left out that I think take away from the story. In fact, I know that if someone watched the movie, but hadn't read the book, some of the story is hard to fully grasp. I know this because my husband came and hasn't read the books. My son and I spent the hour after the movie explaining several things. It's not that there were major story gaps, just some details that make the world, the culture and the characters make more sense were missing.

Also, Jennifer Lawrence did a great job.

1Powerslave
03-28-2012, 07:57 AM
The books were never supposed to be Battle Royale, and honestly, they're better for not being so grotesque. Haven't seen the movie yet, but you have to realize that there's a fine line to be tread if you don't want the movie to be seen in the same light as BR.

Because it only takes one of those 12 year old children being killed as brutally as it is hinted at in the books to turn the movie into something much uglier and nastier, and certainly not anything that would be considered appropriate to youth in this country.I haven't seen Battle Royal, maybe that movies goes too far for mainstream audience (or government/society morals). In general I'm not one of those that think all gore, sex, drugs and nakedness per definition is superfluous. Part of the charm with The Hunger Games (books) was that the brutalness of the whole setup and the man against man in the Arena got through to me as a reader. It didn't in the movies, in part because of glossing over intense action and brutal violence and suspense scenes from the books. For me, showing those parts in all their gruesome detail does convey the terribleness of that moment, and one bloodless still "yea, she died moving on" just doesn't sink in in all it's glory.

Take for instance when Katniss was stuck in the tree and the careers stood just under it having a conversation. For me they didn't capture that scene. Katniss behaved unaffected of it all in the movie, when in the books she was terrified of them hearing her. Same with when she retrieved the bow from the disfigured body.

Also, I tend to get severely nauseated and/or dizzy with too much goreAw. :)

I saw it, and I liked it. For the most part. My biggest issue wasn't the lack of gore- they didn't leave out any death, they just didn't show it in detail, which is fine by me. I am a little disappointed in some things that were left out that I think take away from the story. In fact, I know that if someone watched the movie, but hadn't read the book, some of the story is hard to fully grasp. I know this because my husband came and hasn't read the books. My son and I spent the hour after the movie explaining several things. It's not that there were major story gaps, just some details that make the world, the culture and the characters make more sense were missing.

Also, Jennifer Lawrence did a great job.
I guess my lowering expectations worked. :P

I experienced some of the same about having to explain the overall story to a friend. But to be fair, I don't think the first book touch the overall story arc that much. Mockingjay pin, situation in the other districts, civil unrest. I think that was all introduced in book two, no?

I also think that, the relationship between Katniss and Peeta could've been expanded on. Like their nights together on the train and that Katniss didn't have nightmares those nights, how they supported each other, became close friends, but still that pragmatic distance from Katniss about surviving having to kill him, and return to Prim etc.. But not all of this is perhaps that easy to get into a motion picture when there was so much that just went on in Katniss head.

yks 6nnetu hing
03-28-2012, 09:15 AM
I also think that, the relationship between Katniss and Peeta could've been expanded on. Like their nights together on the train and that Katniss didn't have nightmares those nights, how they supported each other, became close friends, but still that pragmatic distance from Katniss about surviving having to kill him, and return to Prim etc.. But not all of this is perhaps that easy to get into a motion picture when there was so much that just went on in Katniss head.

um... weren't the train-nights also in book 2? during the press-blitz... Book 1 she was a complete and dotal bitch to Peeta, in the beginning anyways.

1Powerslave
03-28-2012, 09:49 AM
um... weren't the train-nights also in book 2? during the press-blitz... Book 1 she was a complete and dotal bitch to Peeta, in the beginning anyways.
Hm, yes, you're probably right about that. And yes, a cold hearted bitch in the beginning. Undeserving of their love, but that also made their love for her annoying at that point. :)

Brita
03-28-2012, 10:27 AM
I experienced some of the same about having to explain the overall story to a friend. But to be fair, I don't think the first book touch the overall story arc that much. Mockingjay pin, situation in the other districts, civil unrest. I think that was all introduced in book two, no?


What bothered me because it was missing:

- Buttercup was Prim's and protected her: a simple scene of Buttercup hissing at Katniss while protecting a sleeping Prim would have sufficed.
- Cinna's prep team: they were crucial to understanding the mentality of those that lived in capital.
- The fact that Cato was wearing body armour and that's why he wasn't dying from the mauling dogs
- Rue's background in agriculture, and why she was so talented at climbing trees
- The sedative to keep Peeta sleeping, sent by Haymitch. Very important detail, imo, knowing what happens to Peeta in Book 3
- And most of all: the gift from District 11 after Rue's death!!! How could they leave that out?

For starters...

1Powerslave
03-28-2012, 11:02 AM
What bothered me because it was missing:

- Buttercup was Prim's and protected her: a simple scene of Buttercup hissing at Katniss while protecting a sleeping Prim would have sufficed.
- Cinna's prep team: they were crucial to understanding the mentality of those that lived in capital.
- The fact that Cato was wearing body armour and that's why he wasn't dying from the mauling dogs
- Rue's background in agriculture, and why she was so talented at climbing trees
- The sedative to keep Peeta sleeping, sent by Haymitch. Very important detail, imo, knowing what happens to Peeta in Book 3
- And most of all: the gift from District 11 after Rue's death!!! How could they leave that out?

For starters...I definately agree on the sedative for Peeta that it should've been in. But I don't remember why it was important later on in book three.
Yes, the gift from District 11 was a very important detail!
Overall I think they should have emphasized more how the nation was watching the games.

Brita
03-28-2012, 12:09 PM
I definately agree on the sedative for Peeta that it should've been in. But I don't remember why it was important later on in book three.


WARNING: Please don't read if you haven't read Book Three!!












It is more (and significant) ammunition for Peeta's brainwahers to convince him to hate Katniss.

eht slat meit
03-28-2012, 12:41 PM
I haven't seen Battle Royal, maybe that movies goes too far for mainstream audience (or government/society morals). In general I'm not one of those that think all gore, sex, drugs and nakedness per definition is superfluous. Part of the charm with The Hunger Games (books) was that the brutalness of the whole setup and the man against man in the Arena got through to me as a reader. It didn't in the movies, in part because of glossing over intense action and brutal violence and suspense scenes from the books. For me, showing those parts in all their gruesome detail does convey the terribleness of that moment, and one bloodless still "yea, she died moving on" just doesn't sink in in all it's glory.

Here's a youtube trailer to give you a rough idea - I say rough because it's just a trailer and not as explicit at the movie. Which starts off with one student killed by a headshot and another stabbed to death... and that's not even in the "game" yet.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3u8VNhNWl8M

It's unnecessary. Battle Royale does have some redeeming points - there's plenty of characterization, and the viewers are meant to feel the loss of each student as they kill their classmates and themselves off.

But the problem is that it's unnecessary. The HG books do all that without needing to resort to cartoonishly graphic borderline Hollywood style violence, and doing so diminishes the story as a whole. Moreover, it ends up being ABOUT the violence less than the overarching plot, which is far more interesting than an arena-styled death hunt.

Again, haven't seen the movie, so I've no idea if HG lived up to the books.

Cortar
03-28-2012, 03:26 PM
Here's a youtube trailer to give you a rough idea - I say rough because it's just a trailer and not as explicit at the movie. Which starts off with one student killed by a headshot and another stabbed to death... and that's not even in the "game" yet.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3u8VNhNWl8M

It's unnecessary. Battle Royale does have some redeeming points - there's plenty of characterization, and the viewers are meant to feel the loss of each student as they kill their classmates and themselves off.

... You just contradicted yourself... The point of the violence was to hit home. HG failed to do that in the slightest. The action in the movie was like watching a Narnia movie where nobody dies and everything is A Oh Kay.


But the problem is that it's unnecessary. The HG books do all that without needing to resort to cartoonishly graphic borderline Hollywood style violence, and doing so diminishes the story as a whole. Moreover, it ends up being ABOUT the violence less than the overarching plot, which is far more interesting than an arena-styled death hunt.

Again, haven't seen the movie, so I've no idea if HG lived up to the books.
............. HG doesn't do this in the slightest. In the end its just another crappy teen love triangle book like Twilight. Except the author once read SK or BR and liked the plot so copied it.

Maybe you missed the point of BR, but it wasn't just about stabby mc stab stab. The island represented real life in Japan. In school, everyone is friends and they live peaceful, easy lives, but once you get a job or get to upper education, everything turns cut throat. In order to succeed you have to best everyone else in your class, work harder, do better, etc.

SauceyBlueConfetti
03-28-2012, 03:51 PM
but it wasn't just about stabby mc stab stab.

I. LOVE. THIS. :D

eht slat meit
03-28-2012, 06:03 PM
... You just contradicted yourself... The point of the violence was to hit home. HG failed to do that in the slightest. The action in the movie was like watching a Narnia movie where nobody dies and everything is A Oh Kay.

No, the point of the characterization was to hit home. Not the violence, the characterization. There is a world of difference. BR hits home by making the kids into human beings with real history, rather than a line of victims in a slasher flick. The killing is incidental. HG does it by painting a very bleak picture, and there is some reliance on the imagination to understand exactly why it is so dark. The killing is incidental - the hitting home is done by the fact that every single year for 74 years, every single community in the known world is forced to witness two of their children being slaughtered in sacrificial combat. BR has a similar angle, but doesn't play to it.


............. HG doesn't do this in the slightest. In the end its just another crappy teen love triangle book like Twilight.

The love triangle, at least in the books, is incidental, and thank god for that. This probably has something to do with the fact that the author does programming and books for small children rather than young adults.

Except the author once read SK or BR and liked the plot so copied it.

She's already quoted as having rejected this. Inspiration for HG comes from Greek mythology, Iraq, and reality TV. Not BR. Or are you suggesting that King and BR copied the plot from the Greeks? Of course not, BR got its inspiration from pro-wrestling, of all ungodly things.

Maybe you missed the point of BR, but it wasn't just about stabby mc stab stab. The island represented real life in Japan. In school, everyone is friends and they live peaceful, easy lives, but once you get a job or get to upper education, everything turns cut throat.

The POINT of BR is listed on the DVD's tag line "Would you kill your best friend?" It's meant to make a sacrifice of children, pitting them against their friends, to ensure that people will not ever trust each enough to join together and fight the totalitarian government. Half of the characterization plots make mention of this.

It's not a metaphor for real life in that world, because everyone is meant to be untrusting sheep, not at each other's throats.

In order to succeed you have to best everyone else in your class, work harder, do better, etc.

And yet... that never happened in BR. Typically the winners ended up going nuts, being mini-psychos that joined the government, untrustworthy rebels, and in the worst case, a complete mangina who shouldn't have survived the first round. The best, the hardest working, the smartest, are the first to die when their survival instinct gets them taken out by not any of those... instead, it's the most ruthless that win. Look at Kiriyama. The dude's borderline autistic savant and him winning wouldn't have been a credit to this "point".

Davian93
03-28-2012, 07:25 PM
Yes, BR was SOOOO original...Here's my favorite scene from that movie:

http://eightiesmovies.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/runningman.jpg

yks 6nnetu hing
04-02-2012, 06:55 AM
Saw the movie and liked it. The actual gore was not present, instead they'd gone more thriller-ish with the movie. Which is fine by me.

The actor who played Peeta was either made up to be or really is very unfortunate-looking. I mean, there were girls actually laughing out loud when he was referred to as "handsome". "cross-eyed" and "constipated" would be a better descriptive.

I had imagined the Capitol as more... ultra-violet lights with gleaming white/almost neon plush walls everywhere so the industrial feel was a bit of a surprise. I really wonder how they're going to contrast District 13 now.

1Powerslave
04-02-2012, 07:27 AM
The actor who played Peeta was either made up to be or really is very unfortunate-looking. I mean, there were girls actually laughing out loud when he was referred to as "handsome". "cross-eyed" and "constipated" would be a better descriptive.Hehehe. Admit it Yks, you're just angry because he didn't glitter like Edward in Twilight. ;)

But he did look rather like a baker's boy... He should've been bigger though, he was small and Katniss was taller than him.

yks 6nnetu hing
04-02-2012, 07:50 AM
Hehehe. Admit it Yks, you're just angry because he didn't glitter like Edward in Twilight. ;)

But he did look rather like a baker's boy... He should've been bigger though, he was small and Katniss was taller than him. Well, from what I could see, the actress is Really Tall.

Also, angry is not the right word... just a bit disappointed. And as I said, maybe they deliberately made him look "homely" for this movie and plan on prettying him up as they go along... or something...

don't get me started on Edward... the actor looks like he crawled out from under a bridge and is heavily hung over when he's not on screen. And when he's on screen he looks like he's on some sort of stimulant (probably a combination of LSD and speed). Not attractive.

1Powerslave
04-02-2012, 08:08 AM
Well, from what I could see, the actress is Really Tall.
She is 171 cm according to some google hits. So it shouldn't be that hard to get an actor that is Taller than her, though actors always seems to be Smaller than the general population.

Also, angry is not the right word... just a bit disappointed. And as I said, maybe they deliberately made him look "homely" for this movie and plan on prettying him up as they go along... or something...I agree, they could've picked a prettier Peeta. And a bigger one. I see no point in deprettyfying and then prettyfying (sp?). Was that in the books?

don't get me started on Edward... the actor looks like he crawled out from under a bridge and is heavily hung over when he's not on screen. And when he's on screen he looks like he's on some sort of stimulant (probably a combination of LSD and speed). Not attractive.:D

yks 6nnetu hing
04-02-2012, 08:30 AM
She is 171 cm according to some google hits. So it shouldn't be that hard to get an actor that is Taller than her, though actors always seems to be Smaller than the general population.

I agree, they could've picked a prettier Peeta. And a bigger one. I see no point in deprettyfying and then prettyfying (sp?). Was that in the books?


lol. the impression I got from the books was that he was sort of the District 12 equivalent for a goodie-two-shoes Quarterback (while Gale was "the rebel") and all the girls at school thought Peeta was really hot & stuff. Only, Katniss never thought of him that way. Until the books, that is.

anyways, looks are incidental, I thought he actually did a good job playing the part which is definitely better than getting a real heartthrob who then can't act at all.

Ishara
04-02-2012, 09:53 AM
But he did look rather like a baker's boy... He should've been bigger though, he was small and Katniss was taller than him.

It's less his level of attractiveness, and more his height that is the issue for me, and it's not as if that can be helped. It's escpecially noticeable when you see the 3 actors all together - the actors who play Katniss and gale are just so much taller than poor Peeta. It makes him less beleiveable as a viable love interest.

Davian93
04-02-2012, 09:59 AM
Personally, I would never date a girl taller than me.

I'm sure that makes me a horrible person but its just the reality.

Though, in HS, I did date this girl that was 5'11" (I'm 6'2")...she was willowy and quite beautiful for that height. She ended up being a tad too crazy for me though. A little crazy=good, too much crazy=run away!

Otherwise, I pretty much have always been with girls in the 5'0"-5'5" range for whatever reason.

SauceyBlueConfetti
04-02-2012, 10:07 AM
Heh. I am 5'11 and have been since the age of 13. I never really had a problem with it...dated all different heights thru school days. I haven't seen the movie yet, but the adverts prior to release made me think Peeta was the biggest miscast.

Isn't hurting the box office apparently.

yks 6nnetu hing
04-02-2012, 10:46 AM
I've always been attracted to tall guys: minimum 180-185 cm... Though eventually it's personality that counts most: in HS I had a mad crush on a guy barely taller than me.

I'm not sure if it's because I'm so short myself (154/5'1") or it's because Estonians are on average the third tallest people in the world (the Dutch being the tallest) and I'm just freakishly short by those standards while being "conditioned" to like the norm.

Ishara
04-02-2012, 12:18 PM
Heh. I am 5'11 and have been since the age of 13. I never really had a problem with it...dated all different heights thru school days. I haven't seen the movie yet, but the adverts prior to release made me think Peeta was the biggest miscast.

Isn't hurting the box office apparently.

And that's the rub - I wouldn't say he *was* miscast. From all accounts I've heard, his acting was fine. It was more a problem with some poor direction, and the way that the character is portrayed in the movie - not his skill making the character come alive.

1Powerslave
04-02-2012, 06:42 PM
Personally, I would never date a girl taller than me.

I'm sure that makes me a horrible person but its just the reality.
That does not at all make you horrible, Dav. It's about what you think is attractive, it's your choice. (got my ears stuffed with annoying swedish PC debates, might've missed some irony there. ;))


Though, in HS, I did date this girl that was 5'11" (I'm 6'2")...she was willowy and quite beautiful for that height. She ended up being a tad too crazy for me though. A little crazy=good, too much crazy=run away!
Freaky girls are fun. But yea, too crazy isn't funny.

My preference goes from 160 cm to 175 cm. A girl that is 175 cm can almost look me straight in the eye on heels. And it is a great fit for hugging if she stands on tip toes.

I've always been attracted to tall guys: minimum 180-185 cm... Though eventually it's personality that counts most: in HS I had a mad crush on a guy barely taller than me.Yes, personality absolutely counts most. But for me it is still secondary in the selection process. Physical attraction must always be there.

Ishara
04-03-2012, 07:44 AM
Ha ha...I dated a very tall fellow once (shorter than Dai, though, at about 6'4") and found it sooo awkward to kiss. I practically had to jump if I didn't want him bent over double, which he found amusing as hell. I'm much happier, logistically, with my husband who is maybe not that tall, but perfect for me. :)

Davian93
04-03-2012, 07:54 AM
Ha ha...I dated a very tall fellow once (shorter than Dai, though, at about 6'4") and found it sooo awkward to kiss. I practically had to jump if I didn't want him bent over double, which he found amusing as hell. I'm much happier, logistically, with my husband who is maybe not that tall, but perfect for me. :)

How tall are you?

My current SO is 5'2" so there's a foot of height difference between us and we've never had any issues. I dated a girl before that was 5'0" and we had no issues either. Granted both wore/wear heels that would sometimes be 4" but still.

Ishara
04-03-2012, 08:11 AM
How tall are you?

My current SO is 5'2" so there's a foot of height difference between us and we've never had any issues. I dated a girl before that was 5'0" and we had no issues either. Granted both wore/wear heels that would sometimes be 4" but still.

5'2" on the nose. But I rarely wear heels higher than 2 inches. It's mostly flats around here, if I'm being honest. It was only awkward standing on flat terrain. ;) If there was a nearby staircase/ stepstool all was well. LOL Truthfully though, it didn't seem to bother him any - I guess he was used to it.

yks 6nnetu hing
04-03-2012, 08:24 AM
5'2" on the nose. But I rarely wear heels higher than 2 inches. It's mostly flats around here, if I'm being honest. It was only awkward standing on flat terrain. ;) If there was a nearby staircase/ stepstool all was well. LOL Truthfully though, it didn't seem to bother him any - I guess he was used to it.

We have a picture where he's standing normally, and I'm standing next to him on a chair. he's still taller. Dai thinks it's hilarious to put his elbow on the top of my head and lean.

I on the other hand need to be careful not to find myself behind him while he's cooking (or doing anything else with arm movements): his elbow is exactly at my nose level.

Ishara
04-03-2012, 10:30 AM
Now that's a co-habitational nightmare! I only have to deal with paintball guns on my side of the bed (really? why????) and other random paintball gear in wierd places in the house (monster mask in the kitchen?).

yks 6nnetu hing
04-03-2012, 10:40 AM
Now that's a co-habitational nightmare! I only have to deal with paintball guns on my side of the bed (really? why????) and other random paintball gear in wierd places in the house (monster mask in the kitchen?).

6 keyboards, a cupboard full of cables, soldering gear where the (computer) mouse should be...

But none of that matters because HE does the dishes!

Isabel
04-04-2012, 02:04 PM
LOL. Just to get the thread on topic again :)

I went to see the Hunger Games. I really liked the movie. I am curious how they will do the other movies and if they will stick to the books. (with all the deaths)

Ishara
04-05-2012, 07:21 AM
I'm personally DYING to see who they cast for Finnick.

yks 6nnetu hing
04-05-2012, 07:25 AM
I'm personally DYING to see who they cast for Finnick.

Brad Pitt?

Ishara
04-05-2012, 07:33 AM
Barf. It's funny - I read the character the whole way through the series (and Annie, and his mentor whose name I forget) as being Black, and was shocked - like, a lot - to discover they were not.

Conversely, has anyone seen the tumblr showcasing the appalling racist tweets regarding the casting/ race of Rue, Thresh and Cinna? I'd like to say that it's effing unbelievable, but I guess it's not. :(

yks 6nnetu hing
04-05-2012, 07:46 AM
Barf. It's funny - I read the character the whole way through the series (and Annie, and his mentor whose name I forget) as being Black, and was shocked - like, a lot - to discover they were not.

Conversely, has anyone seen the tumblr showcasing the appalling racist tweets regarding the casting/ race of Rue, Thresh and Cinna? I'd like to say that it's effing unbelievable, but I guess it's not. :(

hmm, I hadn't thought of that. But it would be cool if he were Black.

sadly, I thought casting the Agricultural Slaves (as opposed to Miner Slaves) as Black really... um... stereotypical to use a nice word.

Davian93
04-05-2012, 10:58 AM
hmm, I hadn't thought of that. But it would be cool if he were Black.

sadly, I thought casting the Agricultural Slaves (as opposed to Miner Slaves) as Black really... um... stereotypical to use a nice word.

Well, the reality is that that District is the Deep South and that part of the US has a very high percentage of African Americans (30-40% in many counties if not higher)...its not racist if its a reality of that region...same with all the coal miners being descended from scotch-irish living in West Virginia.

eht slat meit
04-05-2012, 02:30 PM
Seems to me like there really shouldn't be a lot of racial variety, what with all areas not the Capitol basically blasted back into the Stone Age. There's 12 districts, and I get the impression that they're not that large in size. Over the course of however many hundreds of years, they've gotta have homogenized a bit, with some weird racial mix of whatever peoples were in the areas that became the Districts.

Res_Ipsa
04-06-2012, 08:43 PM
So, is the Hunger Games more Harry Potter or is it more Twilight? By that I mean, is it more engrossing tale that is fantasy but oddly real or is it tween drama?

Davian93
04-06-2012, 11:03 PM
So, is the Hunger Games more Harry Potter or is it more Twilight? By that I mean, is it more engrossing tale that is fantasy but oddly real or is it tween drama?

Its neither. Its a well written YA trilogy..."well written" for YA that is. You should read it.

eht slat meit
04-06-2012, 11:27 PM
So, is the Hunger Games more Harry Potter or is it more Twilight? By that I mean, is it more engrossing tale that is fantasy but oddly real or is it tween drama?

It's more science fiction than fantasy, as the more unrealistic elements tend to have scientific explanations for them like mutations. It's also set some centuries in the future of the USA, that dystopia that is mentioned in various reviews. The world in some ways has been blasted back into the stone age and not recovered, yet retains some of the old techno-goodies.

Could be considered fantasy, in that there are heavy overtones of Greek mythology, but Collins does not have RJ's subtlety in using that mythology, and it comes across rather blatant in places.

I found it enjoyable despite being geared to the young adult set, offering the author's personal insights into the nature of war, rebellion and appeasement, as well as less obvious themes. There's a light romance angle that might have been played up in the movie to be more like Twilight, but while it's a fundamental part of the plot, it's not overtly lame or childish like some of those movies might be.

1Powerslave
04-08-2012, 08:00 AM
Barf. It's funny - I read the character the whole way through the series (and Annie, and his mentor whose name I forget) as being Black, and was shocked - like, a lot - to discover they were not.

Conversely, has anyone seen the tumblr showcasing the appalling racist tweets regarding the casting/ race of Rue, Thresh and Cinna? I'd like to say that it's effing unbelievable, but I guess it's not. :(
All through the books I had imagined Rue as being white and blond. She was probably mentioned somewhere as being "olive skinned", but I've done that before, missed it that is. She was so often likened with Prim so that is probably where I got white and blond from. I imagined Thresh as black though, and Finnick clearly white and blond.

Ishara
04-10-2012, 07:36 AM
hmm, I hadn't thought of that. But it would be cool if he were Black.

sadly, I thought casting the Agricultural Slaves (as opposed to Miner Slaves) as Black really... um... stereotypical to use a nice word.

All through the books I had imagined Rue as being white and blond. She was probably mentioned somewhere as being "olive skinned", but I've done that before, missed it that is. She was so often likened with Prim so that is probably where I got white and blond from. I imagined Thresh as black though, and Finnick clearly white and blond.

Actually, both Rue and Thresh are clearly described, more than once, as "dark skinned." It is Katniss and Gale who are described as olive-skinned and dark-haired. Finnick and Annie must be described in the books, but I can't recall, asie from it being pointed out to me that they were not of colour. Cinna was not described either way, but I thought Kravitz's casting as genius.

I think that Collins was trying to describe a society in which people had significantly bigger things to worry about than race. You're judged by your district, not your race - there is no concept of race anymore, in fact.

I finally saw the movie this weekend and have to say that I loved it. Like, a lot. I had gone in with relatively tempered expectations, having read all your reviews as well as the reviews of some trusted bloggers (chief among them Lainey, gossip blogger and mega-Hunger Games fan), but really felt that it was well done.

The Reaping was BRUTAL to watch, and I didn't feel that the audience needed to know the actual significance of the hand gesture. The fact that the entire district made it when Katniss volunteered was enough, and it rhymed with her gesture to the People of District 11 after Rue's "burial."

I actually felt that Josh Hutchinson did a GREAT job as Peeta - the only time is was less than beleiveable was when they were standing side by side in a way that showed me who was taller.

It's not to say that there weren't flaws (crazy jump cuts) or omissions (the true origin of the mockingjay pin) that may hurt the story going forward, but overall I thought it was really well done, and really hope that they can keep the energy of the franchise going.

DeiwosTheSkyGod
04-11-2012, 08:57 AM
I saw it last week too, and I think I actually liked it more than the book. They really made the most of the fact that it couldn't be told in first person. I thought the behind-the-scenes aspect of the game were great and really drove home how sick our current voyeuristic obsession is.

Jennifer Lawrence was incredible, especially in the Reaping and the immediate aftermath. Her voice when she volunteered really got to me. I thought the actors playing Rue and Peeta did a great job, too.

I wish it had been a little gorier, and that the shaky-cam wasn't used during the District 12 shots. Other than that, no huge complaints.

SauceyBlueConfetti
04-11-2012, 10:59 AM
It's not to say that there weren't flaws (crazy jump cuts) or omissions (the true origin of the mockingjay pin) that may hurt the story going forward,

I read an article in Entertainment Weekly about some of the missing characters...and the absence of Madge in particular seemed odd. It was not explained past she was an extra character that could easily be trimmed. The signifigance of the mockingjay seems lost...as does the gift by Madge to Katniss as we find out later in the books the very personal reason for it. This one puzzles me. I wondered if it later would be explained in the movies that the pin belonged to someone in Katniss's family.

Still haven't seen the movie, hoping to go this weekend. Or next. Anyone wanna babysit??? :p Oh, wait, you all are BUSY this weekend. PFFFFT :P

Ishara
04-11-2012, 03:35 PM
Not *this* weekend, that's *next* weekend!

It makes you wonder though, how much they'll be able to get into Haymitch's time in the arena without touching on Madge's aunt. Getting the pin from Sal...maybe the origin will be one of her own, but in a District like 12, where everyone knows everyone else's business, would that not have been common knowledge?

SauceyBlueConfetti
04-11-2012, 04:38 PM
Not *this* weekend, that's *next* weekend!


D'OH!!!!


That gives me another 5 days to try to get my schedule in order. I am still trying to come, but my week is packed and rescheduling client shit is ridiculously improper apparently in the business world. :rolleyes:

Of course getting my hubby to take care of the H-Train ALONE for 3-4 days is not exactly a piece of cake either, but I am OWED at this point!!

Ishara
04-11-2012, 04:56 PM
Oh, how awesome would THAT be? (SO SUPER AWESOME!!!!)

WinespringBrother
04-26-2012, 02:14 PM
Saw the movie yesterday. I liked it for some great visuals that brought some key scenes of the book to life, but didn't care for some of the changes/omissions and the seizure inducing filming of some of the fight scenes. And Donald Sutherland looked like a ornery Santa Claus, not an evil political leader. Maybe if he appeared in holographic mode only...

4/5 stars though