The Hunger Games (Gary Ross)

[TGM]

THE HUNGER GAMES

Director: Gary Ross

imdb (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1392170/)

http://i43.tinypic.com/1zclaxj.jpg

[Kurosawa Fan]

Just got back from this. Some very nice, understated directing, which was a pleasant surprise. Lots of restraint when it came to musical cues, though there was a misstep or two along the way. I still have problems with the story, and found some of the omissions from the book to be head-scratching. Trying to take it on it's own terms, the film moves predictably from start to finish, but avoids a lot of potentially corny moments. Performances are adequate. Nothing particularly impressive and/or poor, just... fine. Which pretty much sums up my thoughts about the film. It was fine. An easily-digested diversion.

[Izzy Black]

I liked this film. Haven't read the novel.

[Fezzik]

I liked it, but didn't love it.

There were some great moments, though, and when the film does things right, it does them very right.

The supporting characters were completely undeveloped, though (the danger of adaptation, i guess), but luckily Lawrence is really up to the task here.

The film's on her shoulders and any failings it has certainly aren't her fault.

One aspect of the film I felt actually improved on the original source...

The origin of the dogs at the end. The book implied they were genetic freaks built on the DNA of the already dead tributes. Really dumb. I like the movie's explanation better.

[Kurosawa Fan]

The origin of the dogs at the end. The book implied they were genetic freaks built on the DNA of the already dead tributes. Really dumb. I like the movie's explanation better.

Definitely agree here. I was very thankful they left that out.

[eternity]

That was one of the only things I actually liked about the book. Just silly enough to matter to me. Meh. Doesn't change how excited I am to never watch this.

[Saya]

Yea, this was ok. One thing that was unclear to me is:

What ever happened to the blonde girl from Cato's district? How did she get killed? Did I miss that?

I think I will purchase the books to see how the story will unfold. Quite interested in that.

[number8]

One aspect of the film I felt actually improved on the original source...

The origin of the dogs at the end. The book implied they were genetic freaks built on the DNA of the already dead tributes. Really dumb. I like the movie's explanation better.

Nay, this is something a lot of people misunderstood and the second book clarified. That's a mind game they played on Katniss. They were just regular mutts altered to look like them.

[Kurosawa Fan]

What ever happened to the blonde girl from Cato's district? How did she get killed? Did I miss that?


It wasn't addressed in the movie. You didn't miss anything.

[Pop Trash]

Nearly 70 mil. on Friday alone. :eek:

[right_for_the_moment]

It wasn't addressed in the movie. You didn't miss anything.

I thought the bees killed her, or was that someone else?

[TGM]

So yeah, I actually really liked this a hell of a lot more than I expected I would.

[Kurosawa Fan]

I thought the bees killed her, or was that someone else?

Did she have the bow and arrow? I thought that was the brunette? Now I'm second-guessing myself. Either way, I'm pretty sure one of their crew went unaccounted for in the final count.

[Henry Gale]

Sooooo: 3rd highest opening weekend of all time.

I guess in the way certain successes like District 9 make Hollywood think that everything needs to have aliens, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of future or current developing screenplays suddenly shift towards being made after studio notes suggest their characters fight to the death.

[number8]

So fuck you, Warner Bros, with your "nobody wants to watch action movies with female heroes" bullshit.

[[ETM]]

I just saw the young Jennifer Lawrence on a "Medium" rerun, playing a victim in flashbacks. It was... weird.

[Mara]

This was pretty fun. Lawrence was perfectly cast.

Liam Hemsworth can't act, and only has one expression. He's not even attractive. Why does he have a career?

Josh Hutcherson is an adorable little hobbit, and he has plenty of charm. I'm really actually pleased that they cast him to be smaller than Katniss.

I haven't seen Wes Bentley in anything for years, and it turns out I totally missed him. His beard was a glorious thing.

[Pop Trash]

I haven't seen Wes Bentley in anything for years, and it turns out I totally missed him. His beard was a glorious thing.

I'm glad he's getting a comeback, despite his previous drug issues. I always liked him in American Beauty.

[Barty]

It has some technical flaws and issues with story development, but by god the anti-war and anti-government undertones are thrilling to see in a movie with such a wide embrace. Of course, it wouldn't work without Lawrence who is great.

[EyesWideOpen]

Did she have the bow and arrow? I thought that was the brunette? Now I'm second-guessing myself. Either way, I'm pretty sure one of their crew went unaccounted for in the final count.

The girl tribute from Cato's district (district 2) was Clove. She was the brown haired girl with the throwing knives who gets killed by Thresh (district 11 w/Rue). The blond hair girl with the bow and arrow who gets killed by the wasps is Glimmer (from district 1). The boy in her district is Marvel (brown haired boy with acne) who kills Rue with the spear and then gets killed by Katniss.

Cato and Glimmer are "dating" so it's easy to get confused that they were not in the same district.

[Kurosawa Fan]

The girl tribute from Cato's district (district 2) was Clove. She was the brown haired girl with the throwing knives who gets killed by Thresh (district 11 w/Rue). The blond hair girl with the bow and arrow who gets killed by the wasps is Glimmer (from district 1). The boy in her district is Marvel (brown haired boy with acne) who kills Rue with the spear and then gets killed by Katniss.

Cool. Thanks for clearing that up.

[EyesWideOpen]

Cool. Thanks for clearing that up.

I just edited something else in which should explain more.

[Spinal]

There are many reasons to dislike The Hunger Games: the absurd over-the-top costume design, the artless emotional manipulation, the dreadful writing. But the film's worst offense is that it refuses to own up to the moral consequences posed by its own premise (or, if you prefer, the premise it has so coarsely borrowed from elsewhere).

Hunger Games pits 24 children against each other in a ... what is the phrase? ... oh, yes ... a battle royale. These children (apart from the volunteers of District 1, the Cobra Kai of The Hunger Games) have been pulled into this death match competition against their will. They represent a cross-section of humanity, pulled from various districts, each with their own distinct personalities -- or, at least, that's what we're told.

You would think that such a premise would offer an opportunity to explore moral ambiguity. After all, how does one preserve oneself in a situation where it is necessary to harm others to survive? Hunger Games sidesteps this question by quickly dividing the 24 kids into three groups: the good guys, the bad guys and the guys who are killed before we ever learn thing one about them. Unfortunately for us, the final category comprises about 80% of the competitors.

Despite the situation and the environment, the film never builds any sort of tension because most of the combatants vanish in an instant. We never worry about our protagonist too much because she has arrived on the scene already trained with precisely the skill she needs to survive, masterful archery skills. And because the script fails to develop its secondary characters, it fails to know what to do with them in terms of plotting. Plot twists arrive arbitrarily from the outside, conjured up by a team sitting around a model of the playing field.

Need giant CGI dogs to bring this film to a close? Sure, why not? How does that give us an opportunity to learn more about the protagonist and her moral character? It doesn't -- apart from the fact that she can shoot giant CGI dogs as well as she can shoot everything else. When she has her final standoff with her blond-haired enemy, his threats and taunts mean nothing because we really DON'T KNOW WHO HE IS. I'm not saying we don't know what his purpose is or where he came from. I'm saying that WE KNOW BASICALLY NOTHING ABOUT HIM. His fate carries no consequence. And so, our protagonist's actions carry no weight.

Without a solid grasp on moral consequence and social commentary, the film devolves into a tiresome chain of child butchery and an utterly dopey love triangle. Before the film started, the audience at my screening jeered the preview for the new Twilight film. After seeing the film based on the latest-book-for-14-year-olds-that-grown-adults-won't-shut-up-about, I'm not so sure Hunger Games fans should feel too much sense of superiority.

[Pop Trash]

I'm kinda surprised you disliked this so much Spinal since you loved V for Vendetta, which also has rather clunky filmmaking mixed in with some heavy handed political/dystopian themes.

[Pop Trash]

What do they call The Hunger Games in France?

A Battle Royale with cheese!

[Dukefrukem]

Didn't like this. I suppose it was a good adaptation. Kept it really clean and true to the original material, but I didn't think the book was all that interesting or novel and I didn't think the movie did anything special either.

This showing also further convinced me that my theater experiences on opening weekend continue to be an annoyance and overall just bad experiences.

[number8]

Edelstein touched on your points, Spinal.


Why is it problematic? Kids killing kids is the most wrenching thing we can imagine, and rooting for the deaths of Katniss' opponents can't help but implicate us. But the novel is written by a humanist: When a child dies, we breathe a sigh of relief that Katniss has one less adversary, but we never go, "Yes!" — we feel only revulsion for this evil ritual.

If the film's director, Gary Ross, has any qualms about kids killing kids, he keeps them to himself. The murders on screen are fast and largely pain-free — you can hardly see who's killing who. So despite the high body count, the rating is PG-13.

Think about it: You make killing vivid and upsetting and get an R. You take the sting out of it, and kids are allowed into the theater. The ratings board has it backward.

http://www.npr.org/2012/03/22/148941034/acting-trumps-action-in-a-games-without-horror

That was one of the things that impressed me about the book: it's fairly consistent in showing, chapter after chapter, what emotional toll it brings Katniss every time someone dies, even when she's not the one killing them, and she even feels guilty when she realizes that she doesn't feel bad anymore when someone she hates dies. That's the advantage of a first-person narration, I guess. It's far easier to show moral ambiguity.

[Dukefrukem]

Tha'ts a really good observation 8 and it's 100% spot on. I agree with both you and Spinal.

[Spinal]

A further example of this film's stupidity: the scene in which Katniss is asked to catch the attention of would-be sponsors. They've been doing this competition for years and years and it never occurred to them that a desperate teenager armed with a lethal weapon might impulsively turn it on the people responsible? In scene after scene, I kept thinking the same thing .... 'I don't believe you. I don't believe you've thought this through very carefully. I don't believe you've constructed a logical alternate universe.'

[Spinal]

Probably because they know they would be thrown into dystopian futureworld jail. Desperate people walk around with guns under there clothes all the time in that dystopian futureworld called Florida.

How is jail a deterrent for someone who has been sentenced to die?

[Pop Trash]

How is jail a deterrent for someone who has been sentenced to die?

Possibility that they might live? I dunno. I haven't read the books plus I missed the first five minutes of the movie, which may or may not have set up this world, so I yield to someone else.

[Dukefrukem]

The threat of pissing off the sponsors and President becomes apparent in the 2nd book. Although I’m not sure why that matters. It’s made clear that you do not want to do what Katniss did, even though it worked out in her favor..for the time being. I just trusted the material and didn't see that as a distraction or continuity problem.

[Fezzik]

How is jail a deterrent for someone who has been sentenced to die?

This is where adaptation sometimes fails.

It's clear in the book (through internal dialogue mostly), that rebelling would basically mean everyone in their district is screwed.

The last time there was a rebellion, all the districts got put through the ringer, and the Hunger Games were created.

If rebellion were to happen again, the implication is that they'd bomb the offending district into oblivion.

[Spinal]

Possibility that they might live? I dunno. I haven't read the books plus I missed the first five minutes of the movie, which may or may not have set up this world, so I yield to someone else.

Ah, so you're one of these people. I've always wanted to ask ... there's 15 minutes of ads and previews ... how the hell do you still manage to show up 5 minutes into the film? And you always seem to be walking in with a tub of popcorn and a soda. Which tells me that it's more important for you to not go 2 hours without junk food than it is to experience critical scenes of exposition and mood setting.

[Watashi]

Dammit. Spinal became a dissenter on a film I haven't seen yet. Does this mean I have to like it???

[Spinal]

Dammit. Spinal became a dissenter on a film I haven't seen yet. Does this mean I have to like it???

How did I manage to see this before you?

[Watashi]

How did I manage to see this before you?
I had to work all weekend thanks to this movie. It was one of the busiest weekends I have ever worked. Every fucking show sold out.

I'll get to it later this week.

[Dukefrukem]

I had to work all weekend thanks to this movie. It was one of the busiest weekends I have ever worked. Every fucking show sold out.

I'll get to it later this week.

So true. I can't remember the last time I saw a sold out showing at 1PM on Sunday.

Maybe Star Wars re-release back in 97?

[Pop Trash]

Ah, so you're one of these people. I've always wanted to ask ... there's 15 minutes of ads and previews ... how the hell do you still manage to show up 5 minutes into the film? And you always seem to be walking in with a tub of popcorn and a soda. Which tells me that it's more important for you to not go 2 hours without junk food than it is to experience critical scenes of exposition and mood setting.

:confused:

I saw this on a whim last night because I was bored and it was playing down the street from me. It was the last showing of the evening and I got there a bit late. Sorry if I upset your delicate sensibilities.

[Spinal]

:confused:


Sometimes I think I am funny when I am not. It happens.

[EyesWideOpen]

Sometimes I think I am funny when I am not. It happens.

I laughed.

[Gizmo]

I liked this. It was pretty faithful to the book and flowed well. I liked what they added and only a couple things irked me that they changed/left out. I hate the choppy cam fight scenes, but that's so common now that I can't blame just this movie.

[DavidSeven]

Ultimately, I liked the film, but I agree with much of what Spinal says about its shortcomings. The description of the District 1 Tributes as the Cobra Kai of the Hunger Games is especially spot-on (and I wish I had come up with it myself). As competently made and engaging as I found the overall film, the use of these characters as easily-identifiable bad guys is utterly lazy. How many cues for smug expressions were written into this screenplay? This truly is what precludes this film from any consideration of it as a truly thoughtful piece. Even if I could accept as given that years of training has transformed these kids into complete vacuums of empathy and cognizable human emotion (which I can't because the film spends absolutely no time establishing this), the writing still fails to be sufficiently thoughtful of these characterizations in its plotting. For example, I can buy baddies teaming up at the outset of this competition, but why wouldn't the alpha (presumably the male blonde) be murdered by one of his cohorts as soon as he first falls asleep? You've already told me these District 1 kids are transparently self-interested killing machines. Don't then try to convince me that these kids wouldn't take the first opportunity to eliminate the game's toughest competition (i.e. their own allies). Even if you could convince me that keeping the alpha bad alive was strategically deft, I'm not buying that any one of those kids would feel comfortably openly sleeping among a group of people whose last purpose in life is to eventually murder them.

With all that being said, I'm truly not negative on the film. Ross's technical vision, while short of invigorating, is still several notches above the type of generic crafstmanship we've come to expect from a studio hire. And while the film is weak on thoughtfulness in characterization, it is strong on pacing and engrossing storytelling. Lawrence, who I found uninspiring in both Winter's Bone and X-Men, surprisingly expresses sufficient pathos to easily carry the film. Hutcherson, too, strikes the appropriate notes in a role that demands a complicated performance. Although the film's commentary on culture and media is fairly rote and obvious, I still appreciated its execution and precision. To its very last minute, the film successfully portrays a character's ascension to heroism and, in stark contrast, her succumbing to the expectations her vile culture. And even after the game is over, she continues to play the part. I found this interesting, particularly because of the film's survival game premise. In the end, proclaimed ideals are useless because self-interest dictates that we ultimately play the game by its rules, even when it's over. I can respect a film that expresses a principle with such clarity and doesn't let its heroes escape scott-free from its overriding truth.

[Spinal]

One moment in the film that I really liked is right after Prim has been called up. Almost absentmindedly, she makes an adjustment to her clothing. Even though she has been summoned to her death, she is conscious of her appearance and representing herself well. At least, that's how I took it.

[number8]

What I find funny is that for a film called The Hunger Games, they kinda glossed over the book's depiction of District 12's extreme starvation and The Capitol's ridiculous gluttony.

[Skitch]

Sometimes I think I am funny when I am not. It happens.

Me too. I hate those people. We call them cattle. I had an extra large couple come into my theater this weekend, ten minutes into the film. He was so fat that his wife had to sit an extra seat away from him. He didn't stop eating the entire film.

[number8]

Ah, so that's why.

[Spinal]

What I find funny is that for a film called The Hunger Games, they kinda glossed over the book's depiction of District 12's extreme starvation and The Capitol's ridiculous gluttony.

Yeah, it's pretty much reduced to one sentence. If I understand correctly, you can obtain food from the government, but in return, your name gets put into the lottery more times. Is that right?

[number8]

Not even food, actually. Basically, every year everyone's names are put in, but you have the option of putting your name in multiple times up to however many family members you have, in exchange for a small supply of terrible sub-rice grain and oil for each family member. It's also cumulative, so when Gale said his name was put in 42 times, it's because he's been doing it for years to get grain supply for his siblings. Peeta's family is actually considered rich just because they have a bakery and they can sell that to The Capitol or other districts. Hunting is illegal, so Katniss and Gale are the only ones able to feed their families that way. Most people in District 12 have nothing so they just starve to death and that's expected.

In contrast, The Capitol is portrayed as a bulimic consumer society, where they have over the top fashion trends, surgical alterations, and gluttonous feasts where they serve more food than they can eat and would periodically throw up during parties just so they can keep eating. In the book, there's a great bit where Katniss gets on the train and realizes that she can eat whatever she wants however many she wants, and it gave her a mix of satisfaction, guilt and anger.

The more I think about it, the more I'm baffled by the movie downplaying all this. It's probably the book's key satire.

[Spinal]

Hunting is illegal

I didn't catch this at all. Seems like an important detail.

[Barty]

Not even food, actually. Basically, every year everyone's names are put in, but you have the option of putting your name in multiple times up to however many family members you have, in exchange for a small supply of terrible sub-rice grain and oil for each family member. It's also cumulative, so when Gale said his name was put in 42 times, it's because he's been doing it for years to get grain supply for his siblings. Peeta's family is actually considered rich just because they have a bakery and they can sell that to The Capitol or other districts. Hunting is illegal, so Katniss and Gale are the only ones able to feed their families that way. Most people in District 12 have nothing so they just starve to death and that's expected.

The film didn't communicate all this clearly enough. Though it's some damn fine satire of military requirement I must say.


In contrast, The Capitol is portrayed as a bulimic consumer society, where they have over the top fashion trends, surgical alterations, and gluttonous feasts where they serve more food than they can eat and would periodically throw up during parties just so they can keep eating. In the book, there's a great bit where Katniss gets on the train and realizes that she can eat whatever she wants however many she wants, and it gave her a mix of satisfaction, guilt and anger.

The more I think about it, the more I'm baffled by the movie downplaying all this. It's probably the book's key satire.

All that would have made the movie so much better, considering the bits of satire and political commentary they already had in it were great.

[Mara]

I didn't catch this at all. Seems like an important detail.

Yeah, that was weird. Peeta was talking about buying her squirrels in front of the authorities like it was no big deal. The only hint that she was doing something subversive is that she had to climb through a broken part of an electric fence to get to the woods.

[Dukefrukem]

I didn't catch this at all. Seems like an important detail.

The giant electric fence wasn't a hint?

[Spinal]

The giant electric fence wasn't a hint?

Not a good enough hint apparently.

[number8]

It's why I'm giving it a nay. In the book, the first half before the Games is my favorite, since it's full of that kind of social and political satire. In the movie, without all that, it's just one long exposition that lacks suspense and I don't blame people who never read the books for thinking the pageant stuff was drawn out. Cinna was damn near useless in the movie.

[Watashi]

Just got back from this. Some very nice, understated directing, which was a pleasant surprise. Lots of restraint when it came to musical cues, though there was a misstep or two along the way. I still have problems with the story, and found some of the omissions from the book to be head-scratching. Trying to take it on it's own terms, the film moves predictably from start to finish, but avoids a lot of potentially corny moments. Performances are adequate. Nothing particularly impressive and/or poor, just... fine. Which pretty much sums up my thoughts about the film. It was fine. An easily-digested diversion.

Agree with this. Sorry Spinal, but I liked this.

Never read the book. So I don't know/care what they left out.

[Watashi]

Not even food, actually. Basically, every year everyone's names are put in, but you have the option of putting your name in multiple times up to however many family members you have, in exchange for a small supply of terrible sub-rice grain and oil for each family member. It's also cumulative, so when Gale said his name was put in 42 times, it's because he's been doing it for years to get grain supply for his siblings. Peeta's family is actually considered rich just because they have a bakery and they can sell that to The Capitol or other districts. Hunting is illegal, so Katniss and Gale are the only ones able to feed their families that way. Most people in District 12 have nothing so they just starve to death and that's expected.

In contrast, The Capitol is portrayed as a bulimic consumer society, where they have over the top fashion trends, surgical alterations, and gluttonous feasts where they serve more food than they can eat and would periodically throw up during parties just so they can keep eating. In the book, there's a great bit where Katniss gets on the train and realizes that she can eat whatever she wants however many she wants, and it gave her a mix of satisfaction, guilt and anger.

The more I think about it, the more I'm baffled by the movie downplaying all this. It's probably the book's key satire.
I thought a lot of this was pretty obvious for someone who's never read the book.

[Spinal]

I haven't read it either.

[Watashi]

This movie needed more Wes Bentley's beard.

[Spinal]

This movie needed more Wes Bentley's beard.

I thought it was a perfect example of the film trying way too hard. It's like all the citizens of the capitol were descended from Stefon.

[Spinal]

This film reminds me so much of Logan's Run in the way it takes a great premise and then botches the execution.

[EyesWideOpen]

I thought it was a perfect example of the film trying way too hard. It's like all the citizens of the capitol were descended from Stefon.

They toned down the citizens of the capitol by a decent amount compared to the book.

[number8]

Yeah I didn't see anyone with dyed skin or surgically implanted cat whiskers.

[[ETM]]

I'll have to mull over whether I'm Yay or Nay on this one, because I keep thinking that pretty much everyone involved did a pretty good job... except the director. What a mess. I never did mind "shaky cam" but this is the worst case of it that I've seen and the first time I wanted to yell "hold it still for a second, please!" at the screen.

[Qrazy]

This film reminds me so much of Logan's Run in the way it takes a great premise and then botches the execution.

Logan's Run is the GREATEST FILM EVER MADE.

[Watashi]

;411097']I'll have to mull over whether I'm Yay or Nay on this one, because I keep thinking that pretty much everyone involved did a pretty good job... except the director. What a mess. I never did mind "shaky cam" but this is the worst case of it that I've seen and the first time I wanted to yell "hold it still for a second, please!" at the screen.

The only time the shaky cam bothered me was during the climax between Cato, Katniss and Peeta.

Other than that, it never bothered me, and it kinda heightened the aspect of the "reality TV" approach to the filmmaking.

I actually thought Ross did a very restrained job in directing. He could have hammered it thick, but mostly let Lawerence carry it herself.

[[ETM]]

it kinda heightened the aspect of the "reality TV" approach to the filmmaking.

Well, there wasn't much of the reality TV aspect in the actual movie, and shaky cam was the worst during bits that weren't part of the "show". As I said, I don't mind the technique at all, but I thought it was extremely sloppily used here.


I actually thought Ross did a very restrained job in directing. He could have hammered it thick, but mostly let Lawerence carry it herself.

I'll agree with this, but I still feel a stronger drive from him could have unified the elements of the story better and made for a better film.

[number8]

The Reaping scene was the best. Really appreciated the lack of score there. Now if only

Rue's death

was handled with the same tact.

[[ETM]]

The Reaping scene was the best. Really appreciated the lack of score there. Now if only

Rue's death

was handled with the same tact.

Agreed. And, incidentally, I was just reading this:
http://www.theverge.com/2012/3/30/2912903/hunger-games-laurie-spiegel-sediment

[Mara]

Logan's Run is the GREATEST FILM EVER MADE.

I love it almost completely unironically.

[NickGlass]

Ultimately, I liked the film, but I agree with much of what Spinal says about its shortcomings. The description of the District 1 Tributes as the Cobra Kai of the Hunger Games is especially spot-on (and I wish I had come up with it myself). As competently made and engaging as I found the overall film, the use of these characters as easily-identifiable bad guys is utterly lazy. How many cues for smug expressions were written into this screenplay? Oh look, they're mocking the way that girl begged for her life! So glad we don't have to feel bad that those dicks will inevitably be savagely killed. This truly is what precludes this film from any consideration of it as a truly thoughtful piece. Even if I could accept as given that years of training has transformed these kids into complete vacuums of empathy and cognizable human emotion (which I can't because the film spends absolutely no time establishing this), the writing still fails to be sufficiently thoughtful of these characterizations in its plotting. For example, I can buy baddies teaming up at the outset of this competition, but why wouldn't the alpha (presumably the male blonde) be murdered by one of his cohorts as soon as he first falls asleep? You've already told me these District 1 kids are transparently self-interested killing machines. Don't then try to convince me that these kids wouldn't take the first opportunity to eliminate the game's toughest competition (i.e. their own allies). Even if you could convince me that keeping the alpha bad alive was strategically deft, I'm not buying that any one of those kids would feel comfortably openly sleeping among a group of people whose last purpose in life is to eventually murder them.

With all that being said, I'm truly not negative on the film. Ross's technical vision, while short of invigorating, is still several notches above the type of generic crafstmanship we've come to expect from a studio hire. And while the film is weak on thoughtfulness in characterization, it is strong on pacing and engrossing storytelling. Lawrence, who I found uninspiring in both Winter's Bone and X-Men, surprisingly expresses sufficient pathos to easily carry the film. Hutcherson, too, strikes the appropriate notes in a role that demands a complicated performance. Although the film's commentary on culture and media is fairly rote and obvious, I still appreciated its execution and precision. To its very last minute, the film successfully portrays a character's ascension to heroism and, in stark contrast, her succumbing to the expectations her vile culture. And even after the game is over, she continues to play the part. I found this interesting, particularly because of the film's survival game premise. In the end, proclaimed ideals are useless because self-interest dictates that we ultimately play the game by its rules, even when it's over. I can respect a film that expresses a principle with such clarity and doesn't let its heroes escape scott-free from its overriding truth.

This. All of this. Except I like Jennifer Lawrence in Winter's Bone, as well.

[Boner M]

Agreed with basically everything Spinal said.

I also found it quite poorly made & toneless beyond the shaky-cam action scenes. Apparently we won't get the satire of reality TV pageantry unless everyone responsible is dressed like members of a Tim & Eric informercial, and even then Ross does nothing to make this ridiculous spectacle consistent with the relatively subdued realism of elsewhere. It never creates a vivid dystopian reality, and again Spinal's complaints about the lack of internal logic ring true.

I haven't read the book and D7 makes some good points about the moral grey area of the final scenes, but I can't agree that the film makes any of its points with precision. I got the feeling that the generic euphoria of the romantic subplot was played up to gloss over the more complex and troubling issues. Anyway, I guess it was watchable and Lawrence carries it nicely.

[Mal]

Well I fucking hated the romance that will inevitably be a factor in the next two films (I didn't read any of the books), but otherwise this was a standard, yet fully enjoyable 2.33 hr film with some good leading roles and funny costumery. Also, Tucci + Bentley's beard. Nice little touches.

[number8]

Now here's a rather interesting take (more on the book than the movie, but same deal).

http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2012/04/whats_wrong_with_the_hunger_ga _1.html


The Hunger Games has this same feminist problem. Other than the initial volunteering to replace her younger sister, Katniss never makes any decisions of her own, never acts with consequence-- but her life is constructed to appear that she makes important decisions. She has free will, of course, like any five year old with terrible parents, but at every turn is prevented from acting on the world. She is protected by men-- enemies and allies alike; directed by others, blessed with lucky accidents and when things get impossible there are packages from the sky. In philosophical terms, she is continuously robbed of agency. She is deus ex machinaed all the way to the end. (2)

For example, though this is a story about kids killing kids, somehow Katniss never actually plans and executes any kids, she's never guilty of murder one. She does kill Rue's murderer, but it was reflexive, a defensive act. Importantly, she does not choose NOT to kill, she does not choose a pacifist position, she explicitly states twice in the book how much she wants to kill. But she never does it. She tries to kill big bad Cato at the end, twice, and fails. Only after he is torn to shreds by mutants does she perform a mercy killing on him, at his request. In other words, she doesn't choose to kill or not kill-- it doesn't come up.


Though this is an example of the feminist agency problem, you should note carefully that the "society" that forces this false choice on women is actually other women, not men, and it starts with the overly invested way mothers reproach their daughters to "dress like a lady." Certainly the original energy for this madness comes from men, from "the patriarchy", but if every man was executed tonight nothing would change tomorrow. It's on autopilot. Case in point: this story of a girl robbed of agency was written by a woman.

So this is why we have a book about a post-apocalyptic killing game that spends zero pages describing how Katniss kills anyone but spends countless pages on how she is dressed, how everyone is dressed. What will she wear? What kind of jewelry? Hair up? Will the "sponsors" like her better this way or that? Her chief weapon isn't a bow, it's her appearance.

[Kurosawa Fan]

That is the exact issue I had with the novel, and why I had no desire to move on with the series. Time and again Katniss is bailed out of any situation in which she must make a tough decision.

[Izzy Black]

The Hunger Games has this same feminist problem. Other than the initial volunteering to replace her younger sister, Katniss never makes any decisions of her own, never acts with consequence-- but her life is constructed to appear that she makes important decisions. She has free will, of course, like any five year old with terrible parents, but at every turn is prevented from acting on the world. She is protected by men-- enemies and allies alike; directed by others, blessed with lucky accidents and when things get impossible there are packages from the sky. In philosophical terms, she is continuously robbed of agency. She is deus ex machinaed all the way to the end. (2)

There are a few of issues to address here. The first is that Katniss is certainty limited in her freedom. That's more or less the point of the film. It's an authoritarian state where no one in the district is really "free" or "autonomous." Now, the question becomes whether Katniss ever gains the opportunity to make small choices, small revolutions within her limited space of autonomy. When she sacrifices herself for her younger sister, it's hard to interpret this as anything else but a woman exercising her free will. It's the simple act of sacrifice (and in a sense, defiance) that puts her under the microscope and allows her to be a symbol of hope for people in the district. Her main focus is to fight and to stay alive for her family.

Now, she's also very lucky, and receives gifts from the sky, but this is akin to a Greek myth, where the heroes needed to receive gifts from the Gods in order to complete their quests, but the dilemma of having to appease the emotionally moody, anthropomorphic Gods in ones quest to obtain a God-like status stresses the conflict of feminist activism in a patriarchal state. Women are constantly required to play by men's rules, wear men's clothing, and adopt men's norms just to inhabit the workplace and be in the same company as men. The paradox is that one must adopt these restrictions on one's freedoms in order to obtain the powers necessary to upset the power structure. You must wear the mask of cooperation and obedience, and what else is Hunger Games than a story about this injustice and struggle for freedom? It's as though the author was expecting something closer to Kill Bill - a completely unrestrained, autonomous kick-ass super-heroine who does what she wills and is in no way challenged by the power structures set in play around her. But Katniss doesn't live in the post-capitalist, egalitarian fantasy world of Tarantino, she lives in a dystopoian, authoritarian state where free will and activism amounts to small revolutions of strategic upward mobility.


For example, though this is a story about kids killing kids, somehow Katniss never actually plans and executes any kids, she's never guilty of murder one. She does kill Rue's murderer, but it was reflexive, a defensive act. Importantly, she does not choose NOT to kill, she does not choose a pacifist position, she explicitly states twice in the book how much she wants to kill. But she never does it. She tries to kill big bad Cato at the end, twice, and fails. Only after he is torn to shreds by mutants does she perform a mercy killing on him, at his request. In other words, she doesn't choose to kill or not kill-- it doesn't come up.

The film doesn't seem to suggest that she's at all interested in killing so much as surviving (or interpreting killing strictly as a means of survival). She certainly has opportunities to hunt people down, but her entire strategy is intentionally defensive. It's reasonable to think that the book parts way with the film on this score. In any case, I don't think this is any real challenge to her agency. Much of this is to blame in part, I imagine, on the PG-13 rating.


So this is why we have a book about a post-apocalyptic killing game that spends zero pages describing how Katniss kills anyone but spends countless pages on how she is dressed, how everyone is dressed. What will she wear? What kind of jewelry? Hair up? Will the "sponsors" like her better this way or that? Her chief weapon isn't a bow, it's her appearance.

I will admit that I did want more development of Katniss' motivation or lack thereof to kill, and in particular, I wanted to see her hunting some people down since they put so much emphasis on her hunting abilities, but I don't think this admittedly weaker element in the film undermines the entire possibility of a feminist reading with Katniss exercising considerable autonomy within the circumstances.

[DavidSeven]

Solid post, Israfel.

[number8]

The book definitely makes it clearer that she's neither a pacifist nor deliberately on the defensive. She actually keeps reasoning over and over to herself that she needs to get a weapon as soon as possible and start killing the others so she can win the thing, even convincing herself that as much as she feels bad for Rue and Peeta, she's selfish enough to want them dead so she can go home. But like KF said, she never gets the chance to face those dilemma.

[Izzy Black]

The book definitely makes it clearer that she's neither a pacifist nor deliberately on the defensive. She actually keeps reasoning over and over to herself that she needs to get a weapon as soon as possible and start killing the others so she can win the thing, even convincing herself that as much as she feels bad for Rue and Peeta, she's selfish enough to want them dead so she can go home. But like KF said, she never gets the chance to face those dilemma.

Sure, but I don't think this is a point of clarity so much as it is a point of difference. There's absolutely no sense in which the film seems to want to invoke the idea that Katniss wants Peeta and Rue dead. Everything suggests to the contrary. The film definitely seems to capture her strategy as primarily defensive.

That aside, I find this a minor point, because she clearly exercises autonomy in other ways, and moreover, the entire point of the film is to show precisely the sense in which her free will is challenged by her situation.

[Dukefrukem]

Ross got $3 mil + 5% back-end on the Hunger Games and he wants more for the sequels.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/hunger-games-gary-ross-catching-fire-twilight-307622

[Spinal]

Right, because the director was really instrumental to this film's success. Fire him immediately for even asking.

[Pop Trash]

I could see Mel Gibson doing a good job, and he needs the work (if not for money, more for something to do so he doesn't continue to slip into a Xanadu like funk). The problem being it would immediately become A MEL GIBSON FILM and all the controversy that goes with it.

[Spinal]

I could see Mel Gibson doing a good job

When has that ever happened?

[Dukefrukem]

So it's official. Gary Ross will not be returning for the sequel

[number8]

Good. I saw Kathryn Bigelow's name being thrown into the hat. She's probably busy at the moment with the Osama movie, so save her for Mockingjay. That'll be a really good fit.

[Spinal]

Damn, Gary. Even Chris Columbus got a second film.

[Raiders]

Doesn't seem official. All sites are now reporting talks are resuming.

[number8]

Okay, NOW it's official.


Despite recent speculation in the media, and after difficult but sincere consideration, I have decided not to direct Catching Fire. As a writer and a director, I simply don’t have the time I need to write and prep the movie I would have wanted to make because of the fixed and tight production schedule.

I loved making The Hunger Games – it was the happiest experience of my professional life. Lionsgate was supportive of me in a manner that few directors ever experience in a franchise: they empowered me to make the film I wanted to make and backed the movie in a way that requires no explanation beyond the remarkable results. And contrary to what has been reported, negotiations with Lionsgate have not been problematic. They have also been very understanding of me through this difficult decision.

I also cannot say enough about the people I worked with: Producer Nina Jacobson, a great collaborator and a true friend; the brilliant Suzanne Collins, who entrusted us with her most amazing and important story; the gifted and remarkable Jennifer Lawrence whose performance exceeded my wildest expectations, and the rest of the incredible cast, whom I am proud to call my friends.

To the fans I want to say thank you for your support your faith, your enthusiasm and your trust. Hard as this may be to understand I am trying to keep that trust with you. Thank you all. It’s been a wonderful experience.

[Spinal]

Okay, NOW it's official.

I'm supposed to believe that it was his choice to not return to the franchise?

[Raiders]

I'm supposed to believe that it was his choice to not return to the franchise?

I buy it. It isn't as though he's used to quick turn-arounds on projects and I'm certain he was making demands in order to accomplish the task that Lionsgate, still a mid-major studio, wasn't going to meet.

[number8]

Well, Lionsgate says it's his decision anyway.


We’re very sorry that Gary Ross has chosen not to direct Catching Fire. We were really looking forward to making the movie with him. He did an incredible job on the first film and we are grateful for his work. This will not be the end of our relationship, as we consider Ross to be part of the Lionsgate family and look forward to working with him in the future.

[Morris Schæffer]

Bad? No, not really, but when the most terrifying threat is represented by three vicious dogs conjured up out of what literally felt like a few button presses, your movie's in trouble. Same with the forest fire, same with the tree. The premise doesn't quite Convince. The shaking camera, which is putting it oh so mildly, makes the Bourne movies look like artful European pictures. I get why they did it, but maybe that makes it even worse. What a bland universe, took ages to get going too. I'll probably go with a download for the sequels or read the later books.

[number8]

I know people pretty much put this movie behind them as soon as The Avengers came out, but I finally wrote down (http://www.justpressplay.net/articles/9424-the-problem-with-qthe-hunger-gamesq-that-qcatching-fireq-should-avoid.html) the differences between the book and the movie that I found problematic.

[Pop Trash]

I guess instead of getting an interesting new director on board they went with...the guy who directed I Am Legend. :|

[slqrick]

I know people pretty much put this movie behind them as soon as The Avengers came out, but I finally wrote down (http://www.justpressplay.net/articles/9424-the-problem-with-qthe-hunger-gamesq-that-qcatching-fireq-should-avoid.html) the differences between the book and the movie that I found problematic.

Solid write up. I pretty much agree, and I think I really missed not being able to get Katniss' inner dialogue conveyed. That and the lack of intensity in the Capital scenes. The Reaping was probably my favorite scene.

[Thirdmango]

Watched this for the first time today, and I didn't really like it. I'd say the thing I hated the most were the devil dogs. Simply because it was like breaking the fourth wall when she commented on the dogs, we can't think of any other way for us to actually kill each other so let's introduce some random dogs. If this show is getting such high ratings as is wouldn't they want the kids to just keep fighting for another couple days?

Maybe it didn't help that I watched Battle Royale for the first time two weeks ago, but one of the things I really enjoyed in that one was when there were eight people left, all eight of the characters had been introduced and so I could remember who each of them were even if I didn't know their names. During the fighting I never knew who or how many there were, I had no idea Rei was in group 11 until the girl was saved by the other group 11 guy, who was eaten for no reason by a devil dog. Also, how would he know about her helping Rei? The only thing I can think of is he got a message in a care package from a sponsor, but they did establish lower levels don't get care packages all that much.

I think it was about 40 minutes into the movie but I actually wanted the blond haired boy to win and for Katniss to lose. She was so brooding and self important. I get why the choices were done with her character and perhaps it was to hit the people who were going to see this opening weekend versus someone like me who waited until it only had two showings and I went to the matinee on a monday.

Yeah, most of my problems are story problems, the music was good, the camera work was okay past the first ten minutes.

Funny thing is, this is the kind of movie I usually tend to like, so I thought going in I would like it, but it just kept jarring me away from liking it.

[Thirdmango]

The giant electric fence wasn't a hint?

I thought the giant electric fence was to keep people from crossing districts. I thought she was just going into district 11 where they have trees.

[Ezee E]

Lots to like and dislike about this.

My main thing is Peeta (the 'lover' of Katniss in D12) seems to be playing with audience expectations the whole time, but it turns out that he actually did love her? I don't understand how he ever did fall in love. Am I missing something there?

Some things are spelled out too easily, like the "Cabin in the Woods" handling of the forest. Almost seems like it'd be better for the Tributes to speculate if it was truly the forest attacking, or the Creators themselves.

Otherwise, really dug the announcement of the Tributes. Not playing any music during the whole scene is pretty ballsy. Also liked the pageant. Very uncomfortable throughout.

[D_Davis]

I liked it quite a bit. Probably more than BR. I felt more connected to the drama and the characters here, and the film relies less on shocking violence. I'm really looking forward to parts 2 and 3.

The shaky cam crap actually made me sick though. It does settle down a bit after the first 20 minutes or so.

The only think I didn't like is the Katniss never really takes control to kill - she defends herself, lets insects kill for her, and puts one guy out of his misery.

Anyhow, I felt like it could have been longer. There is a lot crammed in, but it still felt rushed.

I also really enjoyed a lot of the music and sound design. The wall of noise as the combatants rode up in the tubes to the battlefield was awesome.

[D_Davis]

Otherwise, really dug the announcement of the Tributes. Not playing any music during the whole scene is pretty ballsy. Also liked the pageant. Very uncomfortable throughout.

The musical cues were brilliantly done. Some of the best I've heard in a modern film.

[Winston*]

Found this unpleasant and pointless. Garbage.

[Qrazy]

This was a complete piece of crap. A handful of much better ideas/novels/movies (Truman Show and Battle Royale with a dash of 1984) sandwiched together to form mind numbing tween idiocy. Talk about the exact opposite of economy of style. Shaky cam flat wide shot to jump cut to shaky cam close-up. And when the camera finally does calm down for a moment all we're rewarded with is eye searing Lady Gaga-esque postmodern costume design.

And then there's the narrative, woo boy. CGI dogs made manifest from?? A contrivance to get Kat out of EVERY SINGLE sticky situation.

'I won't kill you this time 12 for Roo, but next time!'
'Oh look wasps.'
'Hrm not sure what to do here... oh good someone else showed me there are mines.'

I read the plot synopsis of the next two books in the series. They seem increasingly excruciating.

[Sven]

The stupidity of its depiction of dystopia undoes any grace Ross wins with his clear ability to mount an expensive-looking moment. About as nonsensical as that awful fourth Harry Potter movie, but more offensive considering its stately pretenses.

[Skitch]

This was fucking terrible.

[Skitch]

I thought a lot of this was pretty obvious for someone who's never read the book.

I didn't. I kept asking myself why they were doing all this to begin with. Nothing in this movie made logical sense.

[Mr. McGibblets]

I really hated this. The first hour of the film is devoted to telling us that Katniss needs to charm the crowds and sponsors without any reason why (I suppose fans of the book already know). We have a 24-person death match that features only 9 characters, all of whom act dumb, some serious murderers and some who never need to kill. A rules-change that makes no sense (is it done so she tries to keep Peeta alive?) in response to situations (rioting and the best player being from an outer district) that should have come up dozens of times before. A character (Liam Hemsworth) who serves absolutely no purpose in this film and seems to exist primarily for the sequel.