Initial Thoughts on the Hunger Games Film
I've seen the Hunger Games film. What follows is a quick-and-dirty list of some of my initial reactions. The spoiler-free nutshell version is this: two thumbs up!
In no apparent order...
1. It's very apparent that Suzanne Collins was involved in fashioning the screenplay. The changes that had to be made to the story in order to adapt it to the "big screen" make sense and hold true to the spirit of the books.
A few of those changes are...
-- The origin of the mockingjay pin has changed. Katniss picks it up in The Hob as a good luck charm for Prim, because Prim is frightened of The Reaping. Prim in turn gives it back to Katniss for her protection once Katniss volunteers as tribute.
-- After Katniss brings the flowers to Rue, the people of District 11 salute her, but they don't send bread. This is one of my favorite moments in the novel, so I was waiting for it, but I ended up being thoroughly satisfied by what substitutes in its place: a chilling glimpse of the riots as they begin in District 11. I understand why this was done, and it is extremely effective.
-- The muttations in the arena no longer have the faces of individual tributes. Believe me, I was grateful. There's plenty of violence to make this feel gritty and desperate, and the film gives us several "behind the scenes with Seneca Crane" glimpses into how manipulated and intentional the dangers are, so it would've been rather redundant. Furthermore, after Amandla Stenberg's brief but unforgettable turn as Rue, I really, really didn't want to see her face on one of those creatures.
-- Peeta's leg injury is dire mostly due to infection, but it's mostly healed by the medicine Katniss picks up at The Feast. He doesn't end up losing it.
2. There are some lovely additions that set the stage for the next film, most of which are short, intense scenes with either/both Seneca Crane or/and President Snow. Donald Sutherland's performance in particular looms large over the picture. Perfect casting there.
Speaking of casting...
3. I can't criticize any of it. Josh Hutcherson is Peeta down to the last breath. Although I originally cast Brendan Gleeson in my head as Haymitch when I read the books, Woody Harrelson completely won me over. Jennifer Lawrence is subtle, understated, and just right. Stanley Tucci steals every scene in which he appears. I initially had reservations about Lenny Kravitz's ability to project the warmth necessary for Cinna, but I shouldn't have worried. And Amandla Stenberg is everything she needed to be.
4. I'd read reviews that suggested the director (or someone, at least) was "Team Gale," and Katniss and Peeta have no chemistry. I disagree. Liam Hemsworth is not at all the man I pictured when I read about Gale, and I'm still not entirely convinced of him as a black-market hunter/trader, but his Gale does have undeniable sparks with Katniss (and a great relationship with little Prim, too). That said, I was sold on the genuineness of Peeta's feelings, as well. The lack of immediate connection between Peeta and Katniss seems absolutely spot-on, considering the fact they are - or, at least, Katniss is - negotiating a tricky "performance" for the spectators and potential donors, always aware of being watched and uncertain of how much from the other is feigned and how much is genuine. The Katniss-Peeta "dance" feels quite authentic.
5. The action isn't sanitized, but it's also not glorified or overdone. I was in a packed theater filled with people who obviously knew the book, and still there were audible gasps at several of the deaths, these scenes were done so well and shockingly. I don't think the film loses dramatic potency for being edited down from the R rating to a PG-13.
6. I wouldn't want to meet Clove in a dark alley. I'm just sayin'.
7. The Orwellian imagery throughout (including President Snow's propaganda film shown before the Reaping and the omnipresence of the Peacekeepers) strongly complements the political themes of the story.
8. I only have a couple of minor complaints:
-- The "shaky cam" phenomenon (to which I'm usually immune - I had no trouble with The Blair Witch Project or Cloverfield) was over the top at the beginning of the film, to the point I wanted to close my eyes. Fortunately, the camera work became friendlier as the film progressed.
-- At several times during scenes in the Capitol (specifically the chariot scene and the tribute interviews), there was quite an obvious discrepancy between the wide CGI-enhanced shots (wow, look at all of those people in that wide-open space!) and the close shots (wow, there are only a couple of hundred extras jammed onto a set!).
On the whole, I'm quite impressed with the movie. I'm anxious to see it again soon.
I'd be interested to hear other reactions to and thoughts about the film!
PS. The Songs from District 12 and Beyond album is quite good!
In no apparent order...
1. It's very apparent that Suzanne Collins was involved in fashioning the screenplay. The changes that had to be made to the story in order to adapt it to the "big screen" make sense and hold true to the spirit of the books.
A few of those changes are...
-- The origin of the mockingjay pin has changed. Katniss picks it up in The Hob as a good luck charm for Prim, because Prim is frightened of The Reaping. Prim in turn gives it back to Katniss for her protection once Katniss volunteers as tribute.
-- After Katniss brings the flowers to Rue, the people of District 11 salute her, but they don't send bread. This is one of my favorite moments in the novel, so I was waiting for it, but I ended up being thoroughly satisfied by what substitutes in its place: a chilling glimpse of the riots as they begin in District 11. I understand why this was done, and it is extremely effective.
-- The muttations in the arena no longer have the faces of individual tributes. Believe me, I was grateful. There's plenty of violence to make this feel gritty and desperate, and the film gives us several "behind the scenes with Seneca Crane" glimpses into how manipulated and intentional the dangers are, so it would've been rather redundant. Furthermore, after Amandla Stenberg's brief but unforgettable turn as Rue, I really, really didn't want to see her face on one of those creatures.
-- Peeta's leg injury is dire mostly due to infection, but it's mostly healed by the medicine Katniss picks up at The Feast. He doesn't end up losing it.
2. There are some lovely additions that set the stage for the next film, most of which are short, intense scenes with either/both Seneca Crane or/and President Snow. Donald Sutherland's performance in particular looms large over the picture. Perfect casting there.
Speaking of casting...
3. I can't criticize any of it. Josh Hutcherson is Peeta down to the last breath. Although I originally cast Brendan Gleeson in my head as Haymitch when I read the books, Woody Harrelson completely won me over. Jennifer Lawrence is subtle, understated, and just right. Stanley Tucci steals every scene in which he appears. I initially had reservations about Lenny Kravitz's ability to project the warmth necessary for Cinna, but I shouldn't have worried. And Amandla Stenberg is everything she needed to be.
4. I'd read reviews that suggested the director (or someone, at least) was "Team Gale," and Katniss and Peeta have no chemistry. I disagree. Liam Hemsworth is not at all the man I pictured when I read about Gale, and I'm still not entirely convinced of him as a black-market hunter/trader, but his Gale does have undeniable sparks with Katniss (and a great relationship with little Prim, too). That said, I was sold on the genuineness of Peeta's feelings, as well. The lack of immediate connection between Peeta and Katniss seems absolutely spot-on, considering the fact they are - or, at least, Katniss is - negotiating a tricky "performance" for the spectators and potential donors, always aware of being watched and uncertain of how much from the other is feigned and how much is genuine. The Katniss-Peeta "dance" feels quite authentic.
5. The action isn't sanitized, but it's also not glorified or overdone. I was in a packed theater filled with people who obviously knew the book, and still there were audible gasps at several of the deaths, these scenes were done so well and shockingly. I don't think the film loses dramatic potency for being edited down from the R rating to a PG-13.
6. I wouldn't want to meet Clove in a dark alley. I'm just sayin'.
7. The Orwellian imagery throughout (including President Snow's propaganda film shown before the Reaping and the omnipresence of the Peacekeepers) strongly complements the political themes of the story.
8. I only have a couple of minor complaints:
-- The "shaky cam" phenomenon (to which I'm usually immune - I had no trouble with The Blair Witch Project or Cloverfield) was over the top at the beginning of the film, to the point I wanted to close my eyes. Fortunately, the camera work became friendlier as the film progressed.
-- At several times during scenes in the Capitol (specifically the chariot scene and the tribute interviews), there was quite an obvious discrepancy between the wide CGI-enhanced shots (wow, look at all of those people in that wide-open space!) and the close shots (wow, there are only a couple of hundred extras jammed onto a set!).
On the whole, I'm quite impressed with the movie. I'm anxious to see it again soon.
I'd be interested to hear other reactions to and thoughts about the film!
PS. The Songs from District 12 and Beyond album is quite good!
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
James
(new)
Mar 24, 2012 02:24PM
Bravo! What an informative and eloquent review, Amy! I haven't read the series yet, and I haven't seen the movie, but I definitely want to now! And not only was your introduction spoiler-free, the rest of the review didn't spoil a single thing for me. Thank you, my friend!
reply
|
flag
I'm so glad you're interested in the series, James! The movie was excellent, but I especially recommend the book series. I think you'd really enjoy it.
You already inspired me to read it, Amy, and I was hooked after the first chapter! I just finished Part Two of the first book, and I'm going to read the entire trilogy. Thank you soooooo much for the review and the recommendation, my friend!
I'm going to finish the first book before I see the movie, and after reading your review, I'm sure that I'll love the movie as well!
I just finished the first book, which I loved; and of course now the second book is UNunreadable! And I intend to see the movie as soon as I can!
Okay, I just saw the movie, and I have to say that your review mostly mirrors my reactions. I just reread the review and have to confess that I was so engrossed that I didn't even notice the shaky-cam scenes at the first or the discrepancy between the wide and the close shots in the Capitol. I agree with you wholeheartedly that the changes made for the film were precisely the ones that were needed to translate needed background to the big screen. And although since I finished the first book yesterday evening I knew what was coming, when Katniss was trembling just before ascending to the arena, so was I, on the edge of my seat and with a pounding heart! I felt trapped and manipulated just as Katniss must have felt--the buildup of suspense was palpable and visceral! A book will always have nuances that are impossible to bring fully to the screen, but this production was very faithful to the content and spirit of the novel. Bring on the next novel, and the next movie, and thanks for your perceptive and, to my mind, spot-on, review, Amy!
I thought that Rue looked a little too healthy just before she died. They could have played up the idea that the fight that just happened was the first intentional kill by Katniss of another tribute the way the book did, I think. Also the ending seemed a little clearer about how the relationship between the two winners was a sham than the more complicated feelings depicted by the book.
I agree, Richard, on both counts. But some things will be communicated more clearly in one medium, and other things in another. The book has has the time to be more nuanced, whereas the movie can be more visceral. There have been complaints that the tributes in the movie didn't look nearly so tired, hungry, wounded, and desperate as they were in the book, and although I agree with Amy that the movie was gritty enough, I also agree that most of the tributes looked cleaner and healthier than I expected from the book.
I had another question both from the book and the movie. I'm just learning from "Catching Fire" that District 11 is much larger than Katniss had imagined and that she postulates that the reaping there might have had to be done in stages. I'm thinking that *each* of the districts would have had to be much larger than portrayed in order to support the luxury and technology of the Capitol. Surely each district is more than one village!
I am SO HAPPY to hear that you enjoyed both the books and the film. I agree with you wholeheartedly when you say, "A book will always have nuances that are impossible to bring fully to the screen, but this production was very faithful to the content and spirit of the novel." Well put! It's wonderful to get to share this with you! Now we just have to wait for the next movie... augh!
I do see what you both mean about the tributes looking a little neater (healthier, more well-fed) than we're led to expect in the novels. As for the size of the districts, I definitely agree that they have to be bigger than Katniss had imagined. There's a map at http://aimmyarrowshigh.livejournal.com/32461.html that takes (and cites) a number of cues from the books and tries to formulate a map based on them. I'm not convinced it's wholly accurate, but I think it's a great springboard for discussion/contemplation. This does raise, as you say, questions about the logistics of the Reaping.
I found that map myself a little before I read your comment, Amy. Guessing where the Panem districts is seems to be turning into a cottage industry! Try a Google Images search on "maps of Panem"! :)
