The Hunger Games

[Impact]

Review, Discuss and Have Fun!

[DeeCee]

I haven't read the books and wasn't even aware Woody Harrelson and Lenny Kravitz were in the movie.I have to say this is quiet a good movie. It builds nicely at the start and then really picks up the pace once the games begin. All the main actors give good performances although the Capital City characters are a bit over the top sometimes and their fashion sense is an aquired taste.

[ddddeeee]

Loved it. Had a few minor problems, namely the handling of Rue and JNH's score, but otherwise I was hugely satisfied.

[lab276]

I loved it. I thought the Rue bit was brilliantly done and it made me cry. The score was great, I especially loved it when it wasn't there, something you don't see much of these days. But it did sound generic when they were fighting Cato and the end.The design of the capital had a very 70's feel to it and reminded me of the rich people in Blade Runner. The biggest problem I had was when it deviated from the first person structure of the film, namely when the show runner and the president were talking in the gardens (or whatever it was). I don't know if these scenes were in the book, but I think they probably weren't.Otherwise, I loved this film a lot, and it's currently my number one of the year, A.

[75Live]

I couldn't get into the movie. It was pretty generic with nothing sticking out. No emotion and no attachment to any characters. Some bad CGI, but decent acting from the main people so that was a plus. The no name kids acting wasn't great though. It dragged once the games started. I did like how she never ran out of arrows like in most action films with guns.I am probably not the demographic anyway.C

Edited March 23, 2012 by 75live

[Noctis]

I really enjoyed it. The performances were all spectacular (Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, Elizabeth Banks, and Stanley Tucci were especially evocative), they got the feel and look of the Capitol down, and they were faithful to the novel. However, I absolutely LOATHED the overuse of the shaky camera. In some cases it was fine, but in others, totally unnecessary and detracted from the intensity it could have otherwise achieved. The biggest problem I noticed was that they would simply glance upon a dead tribute when I am sure they could have lingered a little longer to soak up the death. Some deaths were fantastic, especially the end one.I hate to use Potter as an example here, but they could learn a thing or two from the way they filmed Severus Snape's death. The shaky cam used on half of the deaths was just repetitive and somewhat lazy.I'm sorry if I sound I'm hating on it, because I'm not. I REALLY enjoyed it and I'm definitely going to see it again very soon to judge the film better. My friend who hadn't read the books and knew absolutely nothing about it cried a lot during a certain someone's death (I thought it was quite well done, but more development could have been achieved beforehand).The final battle was easily the highlight of the film. Intense, brutal, breathless, and genuinely frightening. And you know why? It's because they didn't use the shaky-cam at all. The extra scenes for Seneca were great, particularly the last one (LOVED LOVED the final shot of his scene). I'm not sure if I found the ending menacing enough, so a second viewing will allow me to judge it better.Right now, it gets a B+.

Edited March 23, 2012 by Noctis

[ddddeeee]

I thought Rue's death just didn't work, we don't get to know her at all. I remember joking that the cinema should flood at that scene but I didn't even hear a sniff.The scene after with District 11, however, was fantastic.

[lab276]

The scene after with District 11, however, was fantastic.

That's what I meant. When she holds out her fingers and they all do the same... Edited March 23, 2012 by lab276

[Noctis]

I thought Rue's death just didn't work, we don't get to know her at all. I remember joking that the cinema should flood at that scene but I didn't even hear a sniff.The scene after with District 11, however, was fantastic.

I thought Rue's death was all right. I think the greatest mistake was them not developing her relationship with Katniss more. I didn't feel much. However, my friend who hasn't read the books and knew nothing about the film cried a lot. There were quite a bit of girls crying.

[fishstick]

Rue and Katniss relationship wasn`t developed in the book either. The only thing that it had going for it was Katniss constantly thinking she reminders her of Prim. With first person POV gone, I cna imagine that "substitite baby sister" got lost in translation and Rue remained a girl who was here briefly and than gone the next minute.

Edited March 23, 2012 by fishnets

[Noctis]

When are you watching the film?

[ddddeeee]

Rue and Katniss relationship wasn`t developed in the book either. The only thing that it had going for it was Katniss constantly thinking she reminders her of Prim. With first person POV gone, I cna imagine that "substitite baby sister" got lost in translation and Rue remained a girl who was here briefly and than gone the next minute.

They get around that in a pretty cool way in the first few minutes of the movie.The problem is that Rue and Katniss meet up and twenty seconds later they're off to destroy the food. There was a fair bit more to that in the book.

[lab276]

The "substitute baby sister" thing was pretty obvious.

[ddddeeee]

I forgot to mention that Effie is probably the funniest character we'll see all year. I nearly wet myself when Katniss stabbed the table.

[rockNrollaDIM]

Ok, I am VERY happy with this adaptation. As far as book to screen goes- it's wonderful, I feel they captured most of the important elements of the book and did not stray from the source material in any crazy or provocative way. The few changes/adjustments they did make, I feel, were for the better and we obviously have Collins as screenwriter to thank for this near seamless transition from book to script.

I will go ahead and get out of the way first what I didn't like: As I feared, I did find it to be just a little bit more toned down than I would have liked. Box office implications aside, I would have preferred an even more grim, brutal, R-Rated version of The Hunger Games. While I do feel that Ross generally conveyed the brutality of the books, I don't think it was at quite the level that it should have been. I think the biggest reason for this happening, and my main gripe with the film- albeit a small one- is the extremely frustrating reliance on shaky cam technique. This is the most annoying trend in film. It is a TERRIBLE way to shoot action. It's mind boggling that directors think this looks good. It's distracting, confusing, disorienting, and completely takes the viewer out of the scene. You can't tell who's who, what's happening, and the result of jerking the camera around uncontrollably during a fight scene is that you completely MISS the fight. This happened at several pivotal moments during the Games- the opening scene at the Cornucopia for example, the camera was shaking violently and the audio went mute, as well as during various brawls throughout the Games.... I remember Ross giving an interview saying they had a "clever way" of fitting the R-rated violence into a PG-13 film- if this was it, I'm not a fan. I think it is a totally neutering effect.

Besides that, I thought the rest of the film was done pretty flawlessly. I agree with some others that said Rue's death wasn't as particularly moving as in the book, but the scene after with Katniss's peace sign sending District 11 into rebellion more than made up for that. I guess I'm biased as fan of the books, but I don't get complaints that it was confusing. I felt it was straight forward and accessible for non-fans. A technique I thought actually was really clever was the use of a "live commentary" by Caeser Flickerman, and I thought going into the control room of The Hunger Games was really neat as well. Though I am not sure I was crazy about the scenes showing diabolical scheming between President Snow/Seneca Crane. I thought the Capital scenes were really well done- all the set design and costumes were really cool. Some bits in the Games were awesome- the tracker jackers, Katniss blowing up the food pyramid, Foxface and her sneaking around, Clove's attack on Katniss/death, and the final scene with Cato holding a knife to Peeta's throat and having a sort of revelation about his life was awesome...

The acting was superb. Jennifer Lawrence was perfect and she is a stunner. If there is anything "negative" to say, it might be that she is actually too beautiful for the part... I don't know about anyone else but I was fixated on her lips for half the movie. Josh Hutcherson did a great job as Peeta I thought- I don't understand the criticism of his performance. My favorite supporting role had to be Elizabeth Banks as Effie- brilliant portrayal, provided some great comic relief... really a breath of fresh air.

I loved that the film didn't end on the same sour note as the book, with Katniss claiming to be "acting" the entire time... I think that it's just fine to save that for the start of Catching Fire and I'm glad the filmmakers made that choice, really smart decision IMO as the film ending leaves the viewers with a positive feeling. Overall I'm extremely satisfied with the film, if it wasn't for that annoying shaky cam it would have been a near perfect adaptation, which is very rare for a film to get a book just right the way this did. So bravo to everyone.

8.0/10 (B+)

Edited March 23, 2012 by rockNrollaDIM

[ddddeeee]

Hutcherson is getting stick? He didn't leave any impression on me whatsoever but he certainly wasn't bad.

[rockNrollaDIM]

I've seen some reviews saying he was bad, there was no chemistry, blah blah. In THG box office thread, there was some talk of it. I thought he was fine. Not raving great, but definitely did a good job.

[ddddeeee]

I'd agree there was no chemistry. But at this point there didn't really need to be.

[CoolioD1]

My favourite scene was the one where the games began, when the camera was going crazy and there was like, no sound. It felt really brutal without showing much. I haven't really liked any of Gary Ross's prior work but I thought that was an astounding scene.

Edited March 23, 2012 by CoolioD1

[ddddeeee]

Liked it even better the second time. The score is better than I gave it credit for, still not great though.