Cory's Reviews > The Hunger Games

The Hunger Games by Suzanne Collins
Rate this book
Clear rating

by
3254923
's review
Jun 03, 2010

liked it
bookshelves: young-adult, contemporary, science-fiction


The Hunger Games didn't impress me.

When I'm reading a book, especially a speculative fiction book, the first thing I look for is illogical plot holes. I hate them. They ruin books for me. Take Death Note for instance, or even Glee. They are so full of plot holes and illogical inconsistencies, they aren't worth my time. If the author was too lazy to do a bit of research why should I invest myself in their work?

That is how I feel about the Hunger Games.

Sure, the writing isn't bad. I guess Katniss could be considered a strong female character. She kept it together and didn't freak out. She was tough and resilient. But sometimes you want more than that. I like snark, I like humor, I like cynicism. I know there isn't a place for that in most dystopian novels, but you have to make me love the characters. You have to give them some heart. Look at the Animorphs. We had humor and science. I think that's the thing most serious writers miss out on.

But I digress. I started the Hunger Games with high expectations. I thought it would be mind blowing.

It wasn't.

Anyone who's read Octavia Butler or Philip K. Dick won't be impressed. Sure it's YA but honestly, is that an excuse for lazy world building?

Panem is the remnants of the US divided into thirteen districts. The entire political and economical situation of Panem is highly illogical. This is my problem with Avatar: The Last Airbender. When you try to make sense out of the world, nothing fits. Then you're told that you're looking too hard into things, that it's a fantasy world. Sure it's a fantasy world, but we still have rules. If this were and alien world with an alien culture, maybe I'd agree. But this is still Earth. Last time I checked, they were still human.

During slavery times in the US, slaves were looked at as less than human. Now I know the people of Panem aren't slaves. So why are they following this system? In Santa Domingo, the people were enslaved and forced to work for 300 years. They didn't have the freedom the people of Panem have. They rebelled, and after 10 years or so they won. They had to fight again and again, but they maintained their freedom from the French. Those people are the Haitians of today.

Let's look at any civil war situation on the globe. The closest situation I can think of is in Southern Africa. There, children are forced to fight in wars and carry guns. They kill each other. There, they have their hands cut off if they refuse to fight. Did I mention that they're also in a complete system of disarray? I don't believe that Americans can safely travel there. Why isn't Panem like this? I could have accepted the Hunger Games as a whole if, and only if, their country was in a complete state of havoc. It isn't. Apparently each of the districts get along just fine, supplying the capital with goods. What's with that?

And the kicker is, their Ghandi figure, their Martin Luther King Jr., is a teenage girl and her boyfriend. This is our symbol to teens. Apparently, teen love does stop wars, the Earth, and the universe. Look over here, teens fall in love and the gods present us with peace and tranquility for years to come. Yes, the books only continue to get even more illogical.

For a system like this to work, I'd have to have a lot of back story to explain the country's situation. I understand that district 13 was blown off the face of the Earth. So was part of Japan for a period of time. You know, some say they don't even teach their kids about WWII over there. But did that stop the Korean War? Did that stop Vietnam? No. And you can bet those wars weren't started by the love of two teens.

This series could have been brilliant. It had excellent potential. Unfortunately, besides the illogical world building and the gaping plot holes, there's a problem with pacing.

The actual Hunger Games doesn't start until at least one third of the book is over. That's bad pacing. If this were a movie, that's like Nemo getting kidnapped one third of the way into the movie. Also, we waste time building up Gale and Priss, only to find out that they're not even major players in this book. I know it's a series, but a book should be able to stand on it's own. The Chronicles of Narnia do. The first three Harry Potter books do.

Instead, we're stuck with Peeta. He's okay, but he's not interesting. The romance felt tacked on. If the capital is swayed by their ridiculous love story, I swear, they're no better than a bunch of Rose/Dimitri fan girls. Also, we're introduced to interesting characters, such as Haymitch, Cinna, and so on, only for them to be left out of the rest of the book. Either this is a post-apocalyptic/action novel or a character study. It can't be both unless you write it well. It certainly can't be a romance if the heroine isn't even sure she likes the Hero. It was kind of obvious from the first few chapters that Katniss liked Gale. It was even more obvious that he liked her. Of course it has to be strung out into a love triangle for the next few books. *Spoiler* Of course he goes evil and she ends up with Peeta.*End Spoiler*

There was so much hype behind this book, I expected it to be fantastic. Maybe if it wasn't so popular, I'd have a different opinion. But as it is, bad pacing and stupid world building are not the hallmarks of a fabulous novel.

3.0 stars. It's about as average as they come.
54 likes · flag

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read The Hunger Games.
Sign In »

Reading Progress

03/30/2016 marked as: read

Comments (showing 1-50 of 68) (68 new)


♔ Leah. And the kicker is, their Ghandi figure, their Martin Luther King Jr., is a teenage girl and her boyfriend. This is our symbol to teens. Apparently teen love does stop wars, the Earth, and the universe. Look over here, teens fall in love and the Gods present us with peace and tranquility for years to come. Yes, the books only continue to get even more illogical.

Thank you! This is the exact issue that I had with this book- I did not buy the whole idea of star-crossed lovers for a second and I didn't think it was so revolutionary.


I am Bastet Love your review. All these things are problems I also had with the novel.


Cory Thanks guys. I usually think I'm just nitpicking, but I seriously can't stand logic fails.


I am Bastet Logic fails drive me batty. Especially logic fails that most everyone else seems to overlook.


♔ Leah. I concur. The amount of fights that I have been in on Goodreads over logic fail alone frightens me. That and delusional romantics. 99.9% of people I encounter are both which makes them doubly ignorant and stupid.


I am Bastet Delusional romantics who think that things which would normally constitute sexual assault or stalking are sexy!!!


Cory I especially love those illegal delusional romances. Try convincing a Dimitri lover that Rose/Dmika is illegal in California. That it's actually statutory rape.


I am Bastet Mmmmm, jailbait.


Kiki Oh, Death Note. The deus ex machina cripples me.


I am Bastet Also, L was the best. Curses.


message 11: by Kiki (new) - rated it 3 stars

Kiki I know, right? Near was such a flop in comparison.

I knew Rem was trouble right from the start. Whatta bitch.


message 12: by Lina (new) - rated it 5 stars

Lina Cory wrote: "I especially love those illegal delusional romances. Try convincing a Dimitri lover that Rose/Dmika is illegal in California. That it's actually statutory rape."

People argue about that? I ship Rose/Dmika, but it is illegal in California. That's just the law. It wasn't legal where they were though. SMH

Anyway, loved your review. I enjoyed the book a lot, but that's because I didn't follow the hype so there was no backlash. Points are very valid.


message 13: by Cory (new) - rated it 3 stars

Cory Princess wrote: "Cory wrote: "I especially love those illegal delusional romances. Try convincing a Dimitri lover that Rose/Dmika is illegal in California. That it's actually statutory rape."

People argue about th..."


I haven't seen many rabid Rose/Dmika shippers, but they're there on fanfiction.net. I can see where you're coming from though. I ship Zutara, and people think that's crazy.

Speaking of Hunger Games, did you ever do a follow up video on the series as a whole?


message 14: by Lina (new) - rated it 5 stars

Lina Cory wrote: "Princess wrote: "Cory wrote: "I especially love those illegal delusional romances. Try convincing a Dimitri lover that Rose/Dmika is illegal in California. That it's actually statutory rape."

Peop..."



You like Zutara too! (HUGS/SQUEELZ)///calm

I actually still haven't read the whole series yet. I'm waiting for them all to be in soft cover.


message 15: by Cory (new) - rated it 3 stars

Cory Princess wrote: "Cory wrote: "Princess wrote: "Cory wrote: "I especially love those illegal delusional romances. Try convincing a Dimitri lover that Rose/Dmika is illegal in California. That it's actually statutory..."

Yep, I ship Zutara. But try finding a public forum that doesn't bash you for liking it. It's near impossible.


message 16: by Lina (new) - rated it 5 stars

Lina Cory wrote: "Princess wrote: "Cory wrote: "Princess wrote: "Cory wrote: "I especially love those illegal delusional romances. Try convincing a Dimitri lover that Rose/Dmika is illegal in California. That it's a..."

Oh tell me about it >.<


message 17: by Cory (new) - rated it 3 stars

Cory Ashley wrote: "Personally, I would have liked the story more if it were about surviving in the Districts, the poverty, the struggle, the rebellions, from the very start, without the ridiculous Games themselves. D..."

Seconded. Gale, Priss, and the struggle were a novel unto themselves. In a way, because the Hunger Games started so late, it was two books put into one.


I am Bastet Ashley wrote: "Personally, I would have liked the story more if it were about surviving in the Districts, the poverty, the struggle, the rebellions, from the very start, without the ridiculous Games themselves. D..."

I agree as well! If that were the case, there could have been a lot more development of the world and it might have actually been a strong dystopian novel, rather than a cheap attempt at this game thing.


message 19: by Tom (new) - added it

Tom Lichtenberg My ten year old liked it well enough, but everything he told me about it made no sense. I sounded like the old bread and circuses routine with an extra helping of YA angst. Like a lot of people, he's satisified as long as there is a sufficient quantity of action and emotion


Jonathan This review ought to be hidden. I hope the major spoiler in it isn't obvious on the GR site, but I ran right into it in the iPad app. No way to avoid it. Thanks a lot.


message 21: by P. (last edited Jan 03, 2012 08:37PM) (new)

P. Jonathan wrote: "This review ought to be hidden. I hope the major spoiler in it isn't obvious on the GR site, but I ran right into it in the iPad app. No way to avoid it. Thanks a lot."

I don't think Cory hasn't read the other books, so that last spoiler might not really be a spoiler for this book and more of a prediction, or a joke. That's what it seems like to me...

Edit: Ah, I meant to say 'I don't think Cory has read' - sorry.


message 22: by Cory (new) - rated it 3 stars

Cory Jonathan wrote: "This review ought to be hidden. I hope the major spoiler in it isn't obvious on the GR site, but I ran right into it in the iPad app. No way to avoid it. Thanks a lot."

I haven't read the sequels, nor do I plan on doing so.


message 23: by Kathryn (new)

Kathryn How is Death Note inconsistent? Are you referring to the movie, the anime, or both?


message 24: by Cory (new) - rated it 3 stars

Cory Kathryn wrote: "How is Death Note inconsistent? Are you referring to the movie, the anime, or both?"

The manga. I've never seen the movie or the anime.

The misogynistic nature of the manga coupled with the supposed "genius" stature of Light and L are what I find inconsistent.


Claire Your spoiler warning is in an AWFUL place. Some people do read so quickly that a simple mark without PARAGRAPH spaces isn't enough. Also, you should mention that the spoiler is for THE SERIES and not for the first book. I'm really disappointed that I Just had the last book spoiled for me when I was reading reviews for the FIRST in the series. Thanks a bunch. :/


message 26: by P. (new)

P. Claire wrote: "Your spoiler warning is in an AWFUL place. Some people do read so quickly that a simple mark without PARAGRAPH spaces isn't enough. Also, you should mention that the spoiler is for THE SERIES and n..."

Cory hasn't read the other books in the series.

(view spoiler)


message 27: by Cory (new) - rated it 3 stars

Cory Claire wrote: "Your spoiler warning is in an AWFUL place. Some people do read so quickly that a simple mark without PARAGRAPH spaces isn't enough. Also, you should mention that the spoiler is for THE SERIES and n..."

... reading is fundamental. I have not read the entire series. I will never read the entire series. There's a 50% chance that Katniss actually got with Gale. I don't know and I don't care. Learn to read the entire thread before you comment.

Thanks, Kay, Bye.


Claire Cory wrote: ... reading is fundamental. I have not read the entire series. I will never read the entire series. There's a 50% chance that Katniss actually got with Gale. I don't know and I don't care. Learn to read the entire thread before you comment.

Thanks, Kay, Bye. "


Then why bother marking it as a spoiler? If it's speculation on your part, then why not say that? "I bet Collins will have Gale go evil and she'll end up with Peeta." If you're NOT going to do that, then you should at least space out the spoiler warning. Why?

*SPOILERS FOR MOCKINGJAY*

Because your 'descriptor' is close enough to what happens to have it be a legitimate spoiler, even without details. It could easily ruin the experience for some people. I'm not saying it wasn't obvious Katniss was going to end up with Peeta: Collins' writing isn't good enough to convince me otherwise, but your spoiler is still close enough to the truth to be worth a more effective marking.

*END SPOILER*.

I'm sorry if I came off as rude, but even though you haven't read the other books, you clearly have an understanding of them. As a courtesy to others, it would be helpful to better mark your spoilers. Or just not include them at all, since it didn't seem to enhance your last point enough to even be worth mentioning - your argument was sound without it. In regards to your review, I don't disagree with you, though I did finish the series (just today, actually).

I think the problem with Gale is that, even in the second book, he just doesn't have enough facetime with the reader. Collins TELLS us that Katniss and Gale have this close relationship, but the reader rarely sees it in action. Whereas the reader spends time with both Katniss AND Peeta, making their relationship the more obvious of the two because it needs more development. Lastly, Collins is great at building and driving suspense, but like you said, her world building is a bit weak.


message 29: by Cory (new) - rated it 3 stars

Cory Claire wrote: "Cory wrote: ... reading is fundamental. I have not read the entire series. I will never read the entire series. There's a 50% chance that Katniss actually got with Gale. I don't know and I don't ca..."

I get your point, but I'm not editing this review. (view spoiler)

It's sarcasm. Almost every modern love triangle ends with the Gale/Peeta/Cam/Jude turning out to be evil. If I've really spoiled someone, I guess I'm just that clairvoyant. It's like predicting that Bella is going to end up with Edward and that Jacob is going to become evil (which, actually, isn't that far off, though I haven't finished a single book in the Twilight series).


Tessie I will begin by saying that I really enjoyed this triology, but that is not what bothers me about your review. I respect well thought out differences in opinion. However your review is fundamentally flawed. I say this because you start off by basing your review on the plot being full of holes. The story extends over three books, where it builds upon itself, including further development and importance of the Gale and Prim. But what irks me most is the holes in your comparisons. They are not based in fact but in what "some say." Who says?

You say:
"I understand that district 13 was blown off the face of the Earth. So was part of Japan for a period of time. You know, some say they don't even teach their kids about WWII over there."

Who is "some"? Where did you get this idea? This is false, especially in Hiroshima where they have much longer lasting effects of the war than anywhere else. It is evident especially in the story of "Sadako and the 1000 Paper Cranes" and the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park. Unless you mean they don't teach them an american perspective? That's probably true.

You say:
"Let's look at any civil war situation on the globe. The closest situation I can think of is in Southern Africa. There, children are forced to fight in wars and carry guns. They kill each other. There, they have their hands cut off if they refuse to fight. Did I mention that they're also in a complete system of disarray? I don't believe that Americans can safely travel there."

What exactly do you mean by southern africa? South Africa? Botswana? Lesotho? Nambia? Swaziland? You can't just pick part of a continent and say random things about it. Unsafe for travel? You completely made that up. Certainly some of those countries are unsafe to travel, and others are not. But you seem to just be grasping at a few things you heard and using it as a generalization. Secondly, it has nothing to do with the book.

"And the kicker is, their Ghandi figure, their Martin Luther King Jr., is a teenage girl and her boyfriend. This is our symbol to teens. Apparently, teen love does stop wars, the Earth, and the universe."

That would be annoying, if the teenagers were being preachy or trying to do anything other than survive. It isn't their love that stops anything, it's their unintentional act of rebellion. Nobody compares them to Ghandi or Martin Luther King Jr. You did that all on your own, and I think it's a stretch. Both Martin Luther King Jr. and Ghandi refuse to play in games of violence. They both speak to the power of words. Katniss is the opposite of that.

"Also, we waste time building up Gale and Priss, only to find out that they're not even major players in this book. I know it's a series, but a book should be able to stand on it's own."

Who says the book should be able to stand on it's own? As part of a triology, it was never intended to stand alone. The character development and purpose for Gale and Prim become more important as the triology continues. It wouldn't make sense to read "The Fellowship of the Ring" and stop there.

That's all.


message 31: by Cory (new) - rated it 3 stars

Cory Anyone wrote: "I will begin by saying that I really enjoyed this triology, but that is not what bothers me about your review. I respect well thought out differences in opinion. However your review is fundamentally flawed.

That is your opinion.

I say this because you start off by basing your review on the plot being full of holes.

It is. Though, if I were to correct myself now, I'd say that it's filled with world building inconsistencies, not plot holes. Different, but still problematic.

The story extends over three books, where it builds upon itself, including further development and importance of the Gale and Prim.

That doesn't matter. The first book in a series should still stand alone.

But what irks me most is the holes in your comparisons. They are not based in fact but in what "some say." Who says?

Me.

Who is "some"? Where did you get this idea? This is false, especially in Hiroshima where they have much longer lasting effects of the war than anywhere else. It is evident especially in the story of "Sadako and the 1000 Paper Cranes" and the Hiroshima Peace Memorial Park. Unless you mean they don't teach them an american perspective? That's probably true.

Watch this documentary: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Li...

That's where I got my info from. A few Japanese students were interviewed and they knew nothing about WW2 or the atomic bombs. I imagine that they teach WW2 like the schools I attended in Alabama and Florida teach the Civil War.

What exactly do you mean by southern africa? South Africa? Botswana? Lesotho? Nambia? Swaziland? You can't just pick part of a continent and say random things about it. Unsafe for travel? You completely made that up. Certainly some of those countries are unsafe to travel, and others are not. But you seem to just be grasping at a few things you heard and using it as a generalization. Secondly, it has nothing to do with the book.

You didn't understand the context, and I didn't list a specific country because I didn't find it necessary. I assumed that you knew of a country.

Regardless of that, when children in the post 2000+ world are forced to fight in wars, their countries are completely fucked up. Panem was organized and structured and safe, which isn't how that kind of country, where children are forced to fight each other for sport, would be. Do you think any of the countries in Africa where children fight each other are as safe as Panem? Or as organized as Panem?

You know my biggest problem with Panem -- it's filled with idiots. Each of the districts produced one commodity. If one stopped producing, the entire country would fall. And the capital is stupid enough to divide them up by producing districts. I can't remember how long Panem had been around by the beginning of this book, but it was way too long. If one of the districts had a little bit of intelligence (let's say Rue's district) they would stop producing food. The capital can't bomb them because they'd have no food. And an invasion is out of the question. They're stuck with (rather illogical) mutant creatures to fight for them. And, without that district to produce the food/material/whatever, to grow those mutant creatures, they're shit out of luck. For me, Panem doesn't make any sense. If it does to you, well, I don't really care.

That would be annoying, if the teenagers were being preachy or trying to do anything other than survive. It isn't their love that stops anything, it's their unintentional act of rebellion. Nobody compares them to Ghandi or Martin Luther King Jr. You did that all on your own, and I think it's a stretch. Both Martin Luther King Jr. and Ghandi refuse to play in games of violence. They both speak to the power of words. Katniss is the opposite of that.

Again, you misunderstood the context. MLK and Ghandi called for change through refusals of violence. Who are the calls for change in Panem through refusals of violence? Katniss and Peeta, through "love". It annoys me. From what I know of the series, this moment is the inciting point of the rebellion. Katniss is no Joan of Arc and, as you yourself said, it was an unintentional rebellion spark. For me, it was a weak way to end a story, especially since I know that she's going to become the figure head of the rebellion.

Who says the book should be able to stand on it's own? As part of a triology, it was never intended to stand alone. The character development and purpose for Gale and Prim become more important as the triology continues. It wouldn't make sense to read "The Fellowship of the Ring" and stop there.

As I said earlier, a good first book in a series stands on its own. LoTR is a bad example because it is not a series. It is three volumes, originally meant to be published as one volume, divided into six books. Tolkien wasn't just writing a book, he was going for an epic poem.

Check out Inkheart, the first in a trilogy. It's a complete contained story within itself. Check out the first book in the Chronicles of Narnia (not The Magician's Chair, which was written after the fact, but The Lion, The Witch, and the Wardrobe). Check out the first Harry Potter book, or fuck it, Eragon. They're standalone, but leave potential for a series. Arcs are completed, and room for growth is left, but they're never left dangling.

If you have more to dispute, go ahead, but your arguments are based on how much you, as a person, are willing to suspend belief, or a complete misunderstanding of what I find a standalone series book to be.


message 32: by Ekam (new) - rated it 5 stars

Ekam First off Avatar the last air bender does not take place on earth as far as I know. Second how can the districts fight the capital when they have bows and arrows and the capital has flying ships mines and amazing technology. Third the districts don't get along just fine they don't even have contact with each other. You find that out when Katniss and Rue become friends, and Rue explains how her district worked. Katniss even says she doubts they will show there conversation on T.V. because it will let the other districts see how the others work. That leads back to my second point it is hard to start a civil war when the other 11 districts that you would need help from you have no contact with. Fourth yes the games don't start till about a 3rd of the way though the book but if it just started at the games you would be complaining that there was no story leading up to the games. She had to build character and a sense of things before going straight to the main plot. And also this is not a movie it is a book and to me books and movies are a lot different. I can watch a movie in an hour and a half they better get the story going fast but a book I can take a week to read so I really enjoy getting to no the characters not just the action that they are put in. I do agree the romance I feel was forced and not so great but I do feel this book can stand alone just because Gale is not in a lot of the book does not mean he was not a unnecessary character to have, and remember this book is told in first person so of course Gale is not going to be a big part, you should know that when he is not in the games. All and all I feel you are trying to find holes in the book and though it does have a few I think the ones you found are not really holes if you think about it and not just try to find holes.


message 33: by Cory (new) - rated it 3 stars

Cory Ekam wrote: "First off Avatar the last air bender does not take place on earth as far as I know. Second how can the districts fight the capital when they have bows and arrows and the capital has flying ships mi..."

Dude, I don't have time for you if you don't have time for paragraphs. Learn how to use the return key and come back with a properly formatted post if you want to debate with me. Until then, goodbye.


message 34: by Tatum (last edited Feb 13, 2012 08:20PM) (new) - rated it 5 stars

Tatum First of all, the districts are not good... THEIR KIDS ARE SENT INTO A DEATH TOURNAMENT EACH YEAR? Do you call that good? Because I don't. They don't do anything because they're scared: by creating the Hunger Games, the Capitol says "look what we can do to you, and you can't do anything about it!"
Second, where'd you get the idea that teenage love started the rebellion? That is far from the truth. KATNISS is the mockingjay, not Peeta. And Katniss isn't the Mockingjay because she has Peeta, Katniss is the mockingjay because people look up to her, and she has the confidence to stand up to the Capitol. Also, if the pacing were any different, the readers would be confused. If the actual games started in the first, like, 50 pages, readers would still have a bunch of questions. Lastly, the romance WAS tacked on! Of course it seems that way! Katniss thought that Peeta was acting as if he loved her, so she went along with it so that she could survive: it was a strategy. As for the people in the Capitol, they ARE clueless! They are find the Hunger Games intriguing, and they like watching kids kill each other. If they don't see the truth behind that, then they won't see the truth behind a fake love story. Honestly, the Capitol citizens are so ignorant, but it's supposed to be that way. It helped make the book so brilliant.


message 35: by Cory (new) - rated it 3 stars

Cory Galeprimrue wrote: "First of all, the districts are not good... THERE KIDS ARE SENT INTO A DEATH TOURNAMENT EACH YEAR? Do you call that good? Because I don't. They don't do anything because they're scared: by creating..."

If you don't know the difference between there and their, why should I bother debating with you? Use spell check and learn how to break your comments into paragraphs. Thanks, kay, bye.


Tatum Cory wrote: "Galeprimrue wrote: "First of all, the districts are not good... THERE KIDS ARE SENT INTO A DEATH TOURNAMENT EACH YEAR? Do you call that good? Because I don't. They don't do anything because they're..."
Hey, I'm a terrible speller and not so good with grammar. But at least I can understand a book.
Oh, and by the way "their" is used to show possession, and "there" is used to show placements Example: "it was over there". I do know the difference, but I make mistakes, okay?


Megan Okay, sure, it's an organized dystopia. The Games would be impossible if everyone ran amok. The Capitol has the districts so scared into submission that they go along with it. Their authority figures are presented to them. We vote for them, or they are chosen by our communities (in the case of police/Peacekeepers and such). And here, let's go along with what you said earlier: say District 11 stops growing food.

District 4 is fishing. They'd have seafood.
District 9 is grain. They'd have bread and such.
District 10 is livestock. They'd have meat, eggs, and milk.
Every district has its own special bread. The Capitol could get that.

And then would they bomb District 11? Maybe..but they could kill anyone who didn't work in the orchards. Young kids, older people, the sick, the weak. They could make those tributes die horrible deaths in the Games. They could bomb part of the district, just to show that they would.

Also, Panem is a dystopia. The people there have no means of their own transportation. They can't walk out their door and think "Today I'm going to the grocery store, and then my kid has a soccer game, and I'm going to my job as a scientist even though my neighbor is a farmer, and if I wanted to I could book a flight to Europe right now." In America, we can. In many other first-world countries they can. Even less developed countries have the ability to do those things, like, say, Turkey.

The districts have one job each because they'd already rebelled. Why would they do so again in the near future? It's called communism, actually. Everyone has one job to do and that's all they do. They're born into or chosen for this job right away.

Some of them hardly have power. They live in tiny houses the size of hotel rooms. They hunt for food. They don't even really have a money system, they trade just as much.

Teen love is not the "MLK Jr." of Panem. You chose that comparison, but Katniss is not trying to make people see peace. She's trying to stay alive, and she even says that everyone would hate a tribute who had the ability to get themselves and their district partner home and didn't. The romance is tacked on because Katniss was told that it was Peeta's strategy. She doesn't believe it until the end of the book.

As for your other point, first books in a series do not have to stand alone. In Harry Potter, does Voldemort die in book one? No. There are seven books for that. Sure, each one is over the course of a year. Same with the Percy Jackson books. The Hunger Games trilogy does get wrapped up. THG is about the 74th Games, Catching Fire is about the 75th, and Mockingjay is what happens soon after that. They can stand alone, if you think about it. If someone were to ignore the rebellion part, which I didn't pay much attention to the first time I read it, it gets wrapped up. Games, Victor, end. It's the story of a Hunger Games. Would you prefer it to end just after something exciting happens in the Games? Of course not.


Oh, and maybe it's pointless debating with you, too. You made mistakes in your review. "Priss" is not PRIM's name, for one. Why on earth are you judging people on grammar mistakes? It's rude, judgmental, and what do you care about paragraphs? She did have paragraphs. If you had bothered to read her post, it said, "First of all..." and then "Second..". If those aren't called paragraphs I don't know what is. And SpellCheck? Really? Who uses SpellCheck on a Goodreads review?

Kay, thanks, bye. I believe that is the typical order of those words.


message 38: by Kiki (last edited Feb 12, 2012 09:24AM) (new) - rated it 3 stars

Kiki Okay, so, let's just see here: we have two commenters, both supporting each other's points while they both rudely bulldoze the reviewer's points in this cliche, fangirl bitchrant that isn't even reasoning; it's just angry opinions. Clearly, you're just butthurt that someone isn't falling all over themselves to eat this shit up.

On the other hand, there is the fact that Galeprimrue is OBVIOUSLY a sock puppet of Rueprimgale, who is, by the way, so incredibly unimaginative in thinking up names to disguise him/herself. Galeprimrue has one review, a 4.36-star average, and only exists so Rueprimgale can fantroll anti-THG reviews and then pat him/herself on the back and join in the trollin' with another account.

PLEASE. Rueprimgale, you're very, very sad. If you're going to troll, at least have the fucking decency and frankly, the BALLS to come do it yourself.

You really are very, very sad.


message 39: by Kaia (new) - rated it 3 stars

Kaia The Capitol has the districts so scared into submission that they go along with it.

Scared of what?

The districts have hospitals and doctors. Their children get educations. There are supposed to be guards and electrics fences and whatnot, but the fences aren't even on half the time. No one ever catches Katniss out doing her extremely illegal hunting. Ooo, scary.

The districts have one job each because they'd already rebelled. Why would they do so again in the near future? It's called communism, actually. Everyone has one job to do and that's all they do. They're born into or chosen for this job right away.

Actually, they had those jobs before the rebellion. And even if they hadn't, they still wouldn't make sense. None of it makes any bloody sense. Why would you assign a single district to coal mining and then blow said district off the map? Either you need that coal for powering your cities, so you can't afford to do that, or you're just throwing people into the mines to keep them downtrodden.

But if you were doing that, why bother sending them to school? Why let them have health care? If they're just a people mill anyway, and you don't need what they provide, let them live in poverty and ill health, then, if you want to keep them down.

Some of them hardly have power. They live in tiny houses the size of hotel rooms. They hunt for food. They don't even really have a money system, they trade just as much.

And yet, somehow, despite Katniss' district being so poor, there's a bakery that sells expensive cakes that manages to stay afloat just fine. How does that work exactly?

Arguing the inconsistencies in The Hunger Games doesn't work, because the world building is so bad, you just look like an idiot for trying. Also, you look like an idiot for this:

And SpellCheck? Really? Who uses SpellCheck on a Goodreads review?

Anyone who wants to not look like an illiterate moron, would be my guess. Guess that's not you.


Megan First of all, I am not galeprimrue. She's actually my best friend, who chose her username based off of mine, and we've both been using them for over a year. Not that you care. I do not use her account, and if you look, she has her own shelves, her own profile, her own reviews, etc. Heck, go Google both usernames. You'll find multiple accounts with these names and proof that we're separate people.

And people, this is not a how-many-times-can-I-swear contest. Pathetic.

The bakery makes expensive cakes. That's the merchant section of District Twelve and they've had to start their own businesses and carry them on for generations.

There aren't inconsistencies. Suzanne Collins knows perfectly well what she wrote. How does America have poorer and richer areas, then? Is that a world-building plothole? Nope, it's real. Just like in Panem.

If you bother to read Catching Fire, District Twelve gets new Peacekeepers who are much stricter. They catch Gale and whip him almost to death. That is called punishment.

And really, I am not an illiterate moron. I read books and have the ability and literacy to defend them, thank you very much. And there may be SpellCheck here, but Goodreads doesn't detect incorrect uses of words like their and there.

Want to know what you look like an idiot for? Having to argue your points with a 13-year-old. Ha.


message 41: by Kaia (new) - rated it 3 stars

Kaia The bakery makes expensive cakes. That's the merchant section of District Twelve and they've had to start their own businesses and carry them on for generations.

If you've read all three books, then you know that the population of District 12 is quite small. Most of the people there are poor coal miners. It makes no sense for the district to then have expensive bakeries the people there can't afford. There needs to be something to sustain such businesses or they go under.

But I guess I can't expect a thirteen-year-old to pay attention to what's going on in the world and notice how many businesses have crashed and burned since the economy went to hell. If large chain companies cannot sustain business countrywide now, how the hell does a bakery in a largely poverty-ridden area stay afloat? Certainly it does not do so by selling expensive cakes that less than a percent of the tiny population can afford.

Maybe you should at least graduate high school before you try to talk about economics.

There aren't inconsistencies. Suzanne Collins knows perfectly well what she wrote. How does America have poorer and richer areas, then? Is that a world-building plothole? Nope, it's real. Just like in Panem.

That was a complete non-statement. There's no argument there. Suzanne Collins knows what she wrote so there can't be inconsistencies? That's utter bull. What the hell do America's poor and rich have to do with the fact that people with relatively comfortable lifestyles somehow still live in fear or the fact that her "muttation" science is completely invalid? And don't even get me started on the sheer stupidity of the Games themselves.

Cory, I know Mellow isn't this stupid, so it can't be all teenagers. How'd you manage to attract one so asinine?

If you bother to read Catching Fire, District Twelve gets new Peacekeepers who are much stricter. They catch Gale and whip him almost to death. That is called punishment.

Yeah, uh huh. But that's the first time we see this punishment and it happens in the second bloody book. Before that, there's no reason to be scared of the Capitol. What, we're supposed to be scared of the Hunger Games? Twenty-three kids out of millions dying every year is not a scary number. It's a cop out number. Collins wanted to do something big and profound but she chickened out.

Want to know what you look like an idiot for? Having to argue your points with a 13-year-old. Ha.

And how does that make me look like an idiot, exactly? If you're going to come onto someone's review and rant at them, expect to get a response. You want to talk with other people, you don't get to use your age as an excuse. And if you want to use your age as an excuse, go talk to other stupid children.

And take your fucking "Omg noes swear words!" morality bullshit with you.


message 42: by [deleted user] (new)

Your review is very insightful and entertaining, Cory. While I really enjoyed the books, I completely understand the points you listed above.

I'd also like to point out to a few select posters on this thread (you should know who you are), it's really incredibly rude for you to suggest that Cory has spoiled any additional plot points when you have given enough spoilers to ruin the series for anyone who hasn't already read it.

Also, maybe it's because I haven't had to deal with this kind of antagonism before, but I don't understand why some people are getting so bent out of shape about a reviewer who not only critically points out various world-building issues, but gives examples for why this didn't work for her. This is a well-balanced, completely fair review.

I guess I will never understand trolly fangirls.


Jmbswim I have a problem with this. It is perfectly okay to express one's opinions, but bullying someone about a BOOK is where I have to step in and say this is not okay. These girls are 13 and merely trying to constructively debate their favorite book. I don't understand why you "adults" would want to put a mature teen down when she is trying to defend her favorite book. I have to admit it was a well-written review, but it is only Cory's opinion. I don't understand why you feel like you have to dismiss a person who wanted to change your mind on the subject. Have you seen some of the grammar and spelling on this website? Galeprimrue does not even come close to what I have noticed. It makes me angry that you handle it this way when there are a million other things you can say. If you don't have something nice to say, why say it at all?

As for the swearing, I don't understand why you people can't respect a person's wishes to not use profane language. There are many words in the English language, so you are certainly not limited with vocabulary.

Everyone is entitled to their own point of view. At least these teens are reading and talking about literature while most are texting with their friends and watching Jersey Shore. At least they have something to say and are far more educated than most. Who are you to say they know nothing about economics? Why put people down this way over a book? I thought The Hunger Games was perfectly enjoyable and certainly better than the pile of crap we call Twilight. Maybe you should go harass some Twilight fangirls.


message 44: by Kaia (new) - rated it 3 stars

Kaia Excuse me? Hold the phone...they came here and they started complaining.

They came storming in here not to "constructively debate" but to tell Cory how wrong she is. And we're the bullies? Because they're young?

No.

If they want to have adult discussions with adults, they need to act like adults, which does not consist of tromping onto someone's review to tell them how wrong they are.

Who are you to say they know nothing about economics?

When they show a clear lack of understanding of economics, I'm going to point it out. Their age doesn't get them a free pass. Being young does not mean you get to speak ignorantly and have a right to not be called out on it.

Maybe you should go harass some Twilight fangirls.

Yeah, and this right here is what pisses me right the fuck off (ohmygod a swear word NOES--pfft). We did not "go" anywhere or harass anyone. They came here. If they're going to go into other people's space they get to deal with the consequences. But don't go calling people bullies because some bratty kids decided to whine about a review they didn't agree with and didn't like the response they got.

Oh, and I reiterate: take your fucking "Omg noes swear words!" morality bullshit with you.


message 45: by Cory (last edited Feb 12, 2012 01:15PM) (new) - rated it 3 stars

Cory I wonder why this review is getting so much attention.

Look fangirls, I don't have the time to reply to you in detail. I'm in college. I'm sick. I should delete your comments, but my friends have already replied to you and it would be incredibly rude to delete their replies.

Archer, Ace, Kira, and Kaia -- thanks for your replies.


Megan Archer wrote: "Jmbswim wrote: "I have a problem with this. It is perfectly okay to express one's opinions, but bullying someone about a BOOK is where I have to step in and say this is not okay. These girls are 13..."

I'm not using age as a free pass. And also, other than the last paragraph, I wasn't being rude at all in my first comment. I was trying to point out the things that I disagreed with and trying to make others see my points. Not making them, but it's worth a shot to see if anyone can be persuaded.

I have nothing wrong with people having their own opinions. I have opinions too. All I was doing at first was taking the flaws someone else found in the book and explaining why I didn't think they were flaws. Is that illegal? No. Offensive? No more than a review against a book in the first place. Annoying? Sure, if that's how people see it. Harmful: No.


As for not knowing anything about the world: try me. It's called reading. It teaches you things. Economics? Of course not. But at least I can understand the concept of a family-run business that's carried down for generations. Maybe someone had those recipes right after the Dark Days, or remembered them from before even then. They passed those recipes down, and then when they had a chance, they set up a little shop and sold them. Who in their right minds is going to say, "Oh, screw baking. I wanna be a coal miner!"?


And "which does not consist of telling people how wrong they are", what do you think you're doing to me, then? Informing me of my falseness? Like you even said, if you want to have an adult discussion, then act like one.

America's rich and poor do not have anything to do with muttation science. Very true. I never said that; I said that if you expect everyone in a District to do the same thing and you want to know how some have bakeries and some mine coal, then compare it to that. Not everyone in America is a dump truck driver or a drive-through waiter. There are doctors and chefs and designers and whatnot.

Honestly, I would love to take my morality with me, though I thought maybe I'd share, as you seem to have none. It's sad that adults have to pick on "stupid children" to feel big and strong.


Megan I'm not being a hypocrite. Never have I said "You have to be nice" or something and then proceeded to be rude. Well, I did the latter.

Didn't I just say I don't know economics? I meant issues.


Megan Yes, true. But it is also a completely different concept. Based on a country's choices and trade and all that. There are adults who don't understand any more about it than I do.


Jmbswim What, exactly, is your definition of a "troll"?


message 50: by Lina (new) - rated it 5 stars

Lina A troll is someone who goes into a negative review only to cause trouble and has nothing of worth to add to the discussion.


« previous 1
back to top