The Hunger Games- reactions? - Page 4

[themysteriousgrowl]

Posted: 5/4/12 at 8:05am

Finally saw it. It was okay. It's absolutely too long, by at least 25 minutes, and has pacing issues... or maybe dramatic-tension or stakes issues. Dunno. I was bored in stretches throughout. But the action scenes were filmed well, and when things got intense, they were intense. Jennifer Lawrence is a perfect Katniss. The supporting cast ranges from good to bland, though Stanley Tucci has some very good moments. The direction felt a bit... perfunctory? at times, but the production design and overall aesthetic was wonderful, a very sharp and clear vision of the "Hunger Games" world. So, decent, but it would be tough to sit through again. I was ready for the end.

[Brian07663NJ]

Posted: 5/4/12 at 9:00am

Just finished reading the book and eagerly anticipating it in the theater. It was strange to grasp teh concept that this is a book for young adults about the death of 23 young people. However, when I think about what is considered entertainment today it portrays this as acceptable. Yes, the book does touch on it but probably not enough? People were thoroughly terrified of the Capital.

With regards to the visual aspect of violence and death in the movie...always makes me think of a converation I've had with a few friends who grew up and live in Europe. For them, violence on tv is not the norm and it is common for nudity and sexual situations to be viewed. It is the opposite here.

For book/movies like this I try to read the book before watching the movie but did not do that for Water for Elephants.

If you have not read the short story "The Lottery" it is fantastic and one of the memorable things I read in High School. Here is a link to the story online: http://www.d.umn.edu/~csigler/PDF%20files/jackson_lottery.pdf

Great comments by everyone - thanks.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 5/4/12 at 10:57am

The second book is the best of the three!

You thought so? I just found it mostly redundant.

[Elphaba]

Posted: 5/4/12 at 12:17pm

am currently in the last third of the second one.....have to say while I like it, it does seem a bit redundant....but in no way do I feel the movie was too long of the first one. Frankly I had no idea how long it was as it started, I was mesmerized, and then it was over.....was totally engrossed...and didn't even notice time....always like when that happens.

[themysteriousgrowl]

Posted: 5/4/12 at 1:25pm

Everyone I know who's read the series say the books are less engrossing as you go on. I hesitate to say "get worse as they go," but that's what seems to be implied. They all made it through the third one because they'd come so far... but they felt it had grown pretty tedious by the wrap-up.

I, for one, only have a couple of vague ideas about where the story goes and will try to remain spoiler-free for the movies, as the first half of the first book was enough for me to know I'll probably never read the whole series.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 5/4/12 at 3:21pm

Growl, I pretty much agree with your review. The direction is perfunctory--although I think moving from the mediocre/decent director they used (and to his credit he did a lot of work with the design) to the much worse new director will just cause more issues.

I think the problem re pacing is there were too many long stints, particularly in the games arena where you really didn't feel a sense of tension. Compared to the book, there were stretches where it seemed they were just kinda hanging around. The fact that you really have no sense of who most of the people in the arena are (which is understandable when adapting a book) probably adds to that--most of the others are basically just nameless canon fodder whereas in the book you did get a sense of them.

In regards to the books, the second one is redundent--half of it is a somewhat interesting travelogue giving more details to the world, and the second half is essentially back to the first. I actually found the third book really exciting though and the second half the best of all three and most people I know who have read it seem to agree, but I know a few who were tempted to stop during Catching Fire. It probably would have helped if one read them not back to back but with the year intervals they originally had where I suppose the second book could be seen as a refresher...

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 5/4/12 at 3:39pm

Brian, the film holds back on the violence shown, but you're right that the US is someplace where--take network tv for instance--you can get away with violence much more than sex or nudity (unless they're violent sex and nudity--take some of the procedural shows). You notice even a large difference between there and Canada. Bizarre--you read about parents who barely think twice about letting their kids watch some gory movies, but if there's a sex scene they get up in arms.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 5/4/12 at 3:53pm

Sex is a shameful sin. Violence is simply a Second Amendment right.

[beautywickedlover]

Posted: 5/6/12 at 11:33am

Michael Arndt ('Little Miss Sunshine', 'Toy Story 3') has been hired to rewrite the script for 'Catching Fire'.




Toy Story 3 Scribe Hired To Rewrite The Hunger Games Sequel, Catching Fire Updated On: 5/6/12 at 11:33 AM

[sabrelady]

Posted: 5/6/12 at 4:34pm

Well, he bettah type FAST!!!

[beautywickedlover]

Posted: 5/6/12 at 4:49pm

^ The deal is not official yet, but he will have to work double-time to get the script ready for post-summer production.


Michael Arndt in Talks to Re-Write 'Hunger Games' Sequel 'Catching Fire' (Exclusive)

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 5/7/12 at 7:13pm

He's a talented guy but again, I kinda scratch my head why he was chosen based on his past work...

[wickedrentq]

Posted: 5/8/12 at 11:02am

Just saw the movie for a second time. Definitely enjoyed it more, knowing what was left out, and such. But boy, was the ending rushed. I was too busy being upset about the mutts not having tribute eyes to notice just how rushed it was last time.

Re: favorite books...I agree that most people loved Hunger Games, liked Catching Fire, and were so-so about Mockingjay -- most of my friends anyway, but while I loved both HG and CF, and couldn't say which I prefer, I loved loved loved Mockingjay. It actually took me a couple of days to take it all in and absorb everything to sort my feelings, but once that was settled, I realized it was just epic. A lot of people I know felt it went away from the other 2, but I loved it for that. I felt it took what was a great story, and just brought it to a completely new level. You think about the characters, the villains, the philosophy, the events...it's just close to perfect I think. But I think it was also a little too depressing for some people.

I'm not necessarily a fan of this new break-down-the-finale-into-two-movies for the sake of making money, but considering how much I love that book, I'm okay with it.

[EricMontreal22]

Posted: 5/8/12 at 6:21pm

I definitely agree with your take on the books--and I also agree that maybe some found the third one too dark overall (I respect that Collins hasn't given into pressure, and appears not to plan to, on doing some sort of spin off trilogy or further novels).

Ha the lack of the tributes' eyes on the creatures at the end bothered me too. I didn't find the ending too too rushed though--really the first novel ends pretty suddenly too...

[roquat]

Posted: 5/10/12 at 10:19pm

Whatever else I liked or disliked, this has to be the first movie ever made in which the heroine spends the majority of the movie running through the woods being pursued by people who are trying to kill her--and she never once trips, sprawls full-length on the ground, and takes twenty minutes getting up again. (I know she tumbles down a hill once, but that isn't treated in the "I'm a woman, I don't know how to run" style of every other horror movie/thriller.)

SPOILERS: I thought the film was fine, if a little uninspired. Gary Ross seems to have the same problem that Chris Columbus had in the first two "Harry Potter" movies--the fear that "too much" imagination, or a distinctive style, will turn off literal-minded fans of the books. The movie's faithfulness also means that it replicates the book's major weaknesses--namely, that the Games themselves are less compelling than the setup, and that Katniss is never faced with a real moral decision until the end. She always kills in self-defense, and we aren't asked to identify with her victims--they're just evil killers. Rue, the tribute she befriends, conveniently dies at someone else's hands--the scene is affecting, but what would have happened if Rue had been in the "Final Three" with Katniss and Peeta? You know from the beginning that nothing so morally tangled will happen--and that Katniss and Peeta will have to survive for the sequel. Other than these basic flaws, I can't point to anything else major, except for an observation that Liam Helmsworth's Gale apparently spent the apocalypse stockpiling skin and hair products--his shots looked like pseudo-rural Abercrombie and Fitch layouts.

[beautywickedlover]

Posted: 5/25/12 at 1:08pm

The upcoming sequel, 'Catching Fire' has been renamed: 'The Hunger Games: Catching Fire'. Lionsgate is apparently following the strategy that Summit Entertainment has used for its 'Twilight' films; while the first was simply called 'Twilight', subsequent titles are all prefaced with 'The Twilight Saga' and a colon.


Update your calendars: Lionsgate renames 'Catching Fire'

[sabrelady]

Posted: 5/27/12 at 9:20pm

Surprised this is out SO early but will of course purchase:
Aug 18

[beautywickedlover]

Posted: 5/28/12 at 12:05pm

There was a rumor that Robert Pattinson would star in 'Catching Fire', but it was false.


Robert Pattinson addresses 'Catching Fire' rumors

[beautywickedlover]

Posted: 5/30/12 at 10:19pm

This is hilarious.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AxsjRmN9syc

[millie_dillmount]

Posted: 8/17/12 at 10:11pm

Anyone getting it tomorrow? Can't wait! I was one of the few people who read the book but didn't get a chance to see the movie.

[luvtheEmcee]

Posted: 8/18/12 at 1:41am

I'm like the last person on earth who still hasn't seen the movie. I am ready to go camp out at the Red Box to make sure I get a copy.

[sabrelady]

Posted: 8/18/12 at 2:03am

Pre ordered for pickup Aug 18 but cos I'm on nights the whole weekend will not be able to pick up til Mon 20. I am pleased to see they have done a whole 3 hr "The Making of The Hunger Games". Maybe NOW I can get an explanation as to why the frickin Cornucopia looks the way it does in stead of how it's described in the book AS a fricking standard Horn of Plenty in gold ie A CORNUCOPIA!!!

[supportivemom]

Posted: 8/18/12 at 11:41pm

Well, my husband went out and bought the movie tonight and he, my daughter, and I just finished watching it. I did like the movie. I didn't LOVE the movie but I did enjoy it. I never read any of the books and just took it for what it was. My husband thought it was slow in some parts but I do think Jennifer Lawrence did a great job.

[bwayphreak234]

Posted: 8/19/12 at 1:01am

I am probably gonna skip buying this... After reading the first book, I thought I would fall in love with all things Hunger Games. After reading the second and third books though I was VERY disappointing. I could not even bring myself to finish the third book. I thought the first book was phenomenal (and still do!), but the trilogy goes downhill from there IMO.

[bethnor]

Posted: 8/19/12 at 2:09am

don't understand the hysterical love for this work. the need to fill a niche for strong women is well understood, but is seriously undercut by odd nods to the "tween" element (the scene where the girls are giggling over whether she just "likes" the boy or "likes him likes" was particularly disconcerting, as well as having a fey ally who thinks the principal way to help her out while other teens were hunting her down was literally to make her as fabulous as possible).

lord of the flies did children killing each other for sport better.