Topic: The Hunger Games

[Miisanthrope]

It's getting my very sports-centered, un-booky 13-year-old to read (after seeing the movie), so no complaints here at all.

 

[MikeHz]

Just the other day I was talking with a friend and I had mentioned that I was reading The Hunger Games and suddenly she started preaching and ranting about how sickening The Hunger Games were because any fictional book that features kids being forced by bad people to do bad things is evil and going to corrupt society or something.

She hates "Lord of the Flies" then?

[alexbutterfield]

Well they are quite different, despite having some strong similarities.

HG is clearly a damning commentary on the commodification of humanity. Whereas LotF is more of a study on human nature. There's some of that in HG, but I think it's actually about the audience more than the characters, whereas LotF is definitely about the characters, even if they are somewhat archetypes that are intended to be a metaphor for larger society.

[Neon Genesis]

She hates "Lord of the Flies" then?

I used the analogy of calling 1984 sickening because it has fictional corrupt governments in it but she said the analogy didn't apply just because or something.

[MikeHz]

Well they are quite different, despite having some strong similarities.

HG is clearly a damning commentary on the commodification of humanity. Whereas LotF is more of a study on human nature. There's some of that in HG, but I think it's actually about the audience more than the characters, whereas LotF is definitely about the characters, even if they are somewhat archetypes that are intended to be a metaphor for larger society.

Both involve kids acting like dicks.

People are bothered by kids up to age 18 in HG being ordered to kill each other. They are not so much bothered when kids at the age of 18 are sent into battle to do the same thing. Seventeen: "Oh, my God--these kids are far too precious to risk harming a hair on their head!" Eighteen: "Screw 'em! They're adults now. Let the games begin!"

[Kessdawg]

Remember what the MPAA says: Deplorable horrific violence is OK as long as nobody uses any naughty words

[SVoid]

Remember what the MPAA says: Deplorable horrific violence is OK as long as nobody uses any naughty words

Or shows naughty bits.

I'm going to see this Sunday afternoon with my better half and her woman friends. So I doubt I'll complain one way or another.

But I liked the book. It was entertaining. But it felt like it was written by a screen writer (which it was): it was fast paced and shallow. I did find it rather predictable, with the exception of what what the game designers randomly put in to the game (but that was the least important part, in my opinion).

I liked the book. It was entertaining. I haven't read the rest of the series (yet?) but the first book was devoid of any actual exploration of the situation, skirted moral issues, never confronting the world she created head on. Now, that is probably hard to do in a young adults book.

For kids it's great. You can use it to teach media literacy. My hypothetical children would be required to try the Hunger Games along with Harry Potter and His Dark Materials (The Golden Compass). And while I wouldn't deny them Twilight, I've have to read along and point out the many, many problems with the messages in that book. (And that's not counting the Mormon abstinence before marriage thing.) I've seen two of the Twilight movies one night for fun.

(Sigh, you can't link via text to YouTube videos? Sigh. I had to shorten the links.)

[GodSlayer]

I used the analogy of calling 1984 sickening because it has fictional corrupt governments in it but she said the analogy didn't apply just because or something.

children were rewarded for being snitches serving a tyrannical government in 1984. is that supposed to be a positive patriotic message in her view?

[stonesean]

I enjoyed the movie.  Never read any of the books, but my wife had and was jazzed about the flicks.

Solid cast, quick enough plot.

There were a few scenes (the first slaughter at the cornucopia) that reminded me of some of the weirder 70's sci fi films I've enjoyed.....

It's never going to be mistaken for masterful filmmaking, but it's far far less irritating than other YA sourced material that's been all the rage the last decade or so.

I'd describe it as entirely decent sci fi/action flick.

I'm happy that a movie with this bizzare a premise is the #1 movie in America and world wide......well done audience.

[GodSlayer]

I enjoyed the movie.  Never read any of the books, but my wife had and was jazzed about the flicks.

Solid cast, quick enough plot.

There were a few scenes (the first slaughter at the cornucopia) that reminded me of some of the weirder 70's sci fi films I've enjoyed.....

It's never going to be mistaken for masterful filmmaking, but it's far far less irritating than other YA sourced material that's been all the rage the last decade or so.

I'd describe it as entirely decent sci fi/action flick.

I'm am happy that a movie with this bizzare a premise is the #1 movie in America and world wide......well done audience.

mmm, good point.

maybe this will spell less Titan/Suckerpunch/JohnCarter movies and more intriguing blockbusters.

I wonder how Fight Club would've done if it was released in the wake of Hunger Games instead of a decade ago.

[Corvus]

maybe this will spell less Titan/Suckerpunch/JohnCarter movies and more intriguing blockbusters.

I think we may be out of luck on that one.

[Neon Genesis]

children were rewarded for being snitches serving a tyrannical government in 1984. is that supposed to be a positive patriotic message in her view?

But 1984 was an old book so it doesn't count.  Only new books written after 1990 and violent video games cause kids to kill each other.

[D'oh!]

Just saw it tonight.  Liked it, didn't love it.  I didn't read the books so some of the stuff I didn't like might have been in them anyway...

I wasn't a big fan of the costume design in The Capitol.  It seemed lazy to me to just grab up '40s fashions and make them overly colorful.  I did like the look of the rest of the movie, however.

After the allied punks find Katniss, why didn't they immediately kill Peeta?  The head punk mentioned earlier that he was only keeping him around to find Katniss.  Once located, slit his throat.

I hated the fact that the "dogs" were computer generated.  Reading an above post that explained in the book they were actual creatures makes more sense.  If the TV Studio can create creatures out of thin air, why did they find it necessary to firebomb the forest to keep Katniss away from the border?  Why not just change the landscape and put some cliffs in her way or something?

The ending was pretty abrupt.  I understand it was that way in the book, too, but I guess I just wanted a little more story in the end.

Overall, the cast was great and the movie kept my attention, but I don't think I'll be seeing this one again.  Not to say I wouldn't see any sequels.

[Miisanthrope]

I also preferred the movie dogs to the book ones. I found it much easier to accept than the splicing of the dead contestants.

I suspect the fire bombs were partly to actually drive Katniss closer to the other contestants, as she was actively distancing herself from them and where is the fun in that? But it was also because there was all this hype (more so in the books) about her being "the girl on fire", and the designers of the game loved to put that obstacle in there specifically for her for audience-pleasing effect.

It is all about the "ratings"; everyone is already watching, but you need it to be a spectacular experience for the viewer.

[Eternally Learning]

Thr dogs in the book weren't actually spliced with the tributes, just made to look like they were to mess with the remaining tributes.   A big part of many of the Capital's muttations is psychological warfare.  Also, the fire wasn't to keep her from the border and wasn't just for her; it was to drive the tribute together and force them to confront each other.  Too little action is bad for ratings.  Also D'oh, believe it or not, they gave you a little more in the movie ending than the book ending by showing that uprisings were happening.  That was only really hinted at in the book.

Honestly, the thing I really felt the movie failed at was the relationship between Peeta and Katniss.  It was way more complex in the book and sets up a lot of stuff in the next two, so I'm really wondering if they'll even really address it in the later movies.  Also, the pace of the movie was too quick for me.  They made the games seem like they took no time at all whereas they were in the games for weeks in the book.  It was also far less violent in the movie.  All in all though, it was a pretty good adaptation, just not a complete one.