Finally!
So after being behind since forever, I finally got to see The Hunger Games movie. It was very exciting. I give it both a thumbs up and a thumbs down. Now follow me as I delve into very vague and shallow details...
Thumbs up:
The movie was so well done. It stuck to the book as well as any movie could. (Although I hear that Harry Potter is the best at this. No, I haven't read nor seen those, but please put your pitchforks down.) I am most happy when I can follow along the movie scenes with my memories of the scenes of the book and they fit. It's tough to capture on film everything an author puts forth in a movie, but I think they did mostly well with this. They didn't change any major details which is good, because that sort of thing can easily push me over the edge into dislike of a movie.
Let me say that I think Rue was perfectly cast. She was everything in flesh and blood that Rue was in my mind's eye. And yes, before you ask, I did tear up. Only the heartless wouldn't!
The emotions that came across the screen were nearly identical to those I felt while reading the book so that's terrific.
Thumbs down:
I am a reader and a writer at heart and movies will never reach that pedestal. With that being said, The Hunger Games was a movie just like any other movie. If all we were asking from it was to do what a movie does, then I'd say it was pretty close to perfect. The problem for me comes in when I begin to over-analyze stuff. I couldn't sit in my theater seat and only ask for the movie to be a movie. I wanted it to live up to the book which, in my opinion, truly no movie can do for an excellent book. The movie is very limited in what it could convey to the audience and that bothered me. Not because they did anything wrong, but just because that's how my mind works.
Another thing that irritated me (don't judge me) was Prim's cat. That darned cat was not a healthy, black and white with two eyes. I know that this seems like a silly thing to be disappointed over, but I was. I couldn't even explain why it bothered me so much.
Another thing that didn't make me happy was Gale. He did not mesh at all with the Gale in my head and his relationship with Katniss was glossed over at best. I know there is a time limit on a movie, but this is a huge factor in the book and becomes even more important later on. I don't think people who haven't read the book would even get how close he and Katniss really are. But then again, there are several things that are just thrown in to stay true to the book, but don't really seem to fit in the movie.
There are tons of other tiny things that bothered me, but none actually affected the quality of the movie. If I wasn't comparing the movie to the book then there wouldn't even be a "thumbs down" section. The movie was absolutely great. But it's impossible to make a movie live up to a 5 star book. I guess that's a good problem to have though.
Thumbs up:
The movie was so well done. It stuck to the book as well as any movie could. (Although I hear that Harry Potter is the best at this. No, I haven't read nor seen those, but please put your pitchforks down.) I am most happy when I can follow along the movie scenes with my memories of the scenes of the book and they fit. It's tough to capture on film everything an author puts forth in a movie, but I think they did mostly well with this. They didn't change any major details which is good, because that sort of thing can easily push me over the edge into dislike of a movie.
Let me say that I think Rue was perfectly cast. She was everything in flesh and blood that Rue was in my mind's eye. And yes, before you ask, I did tear up. Only the heartless wouldn't!
The emotions that came across the screen were nearly identical to those I felt while reading the book so that's terrific.
Thumbs down:
I am a reader and a writer at heart and movies will never reach that pedestal. With that being said, The Hunger Games was a movie just like any other movie. If all we were asking from it was to do what a movie does, then I'd say it was pretty close to perfect. The problem for me comes in when I begin to over-analyze stuff. I couldn't sit in my theater seat and only ask for the movie to be a movie. I wanted it to live up to the book which, in my opinion, truly no movie can do for an excellent book. The movie is very limited in what it could convey to the audience and that bothered me. Not because they did anything wrong, but just because that's how my mind works.
Another thing that irritated me (don't judge me) was Prim's cat. That darned cat was not a healthy, black and white with two eyes. I know that this seems like a silly thing to be disappointed over, but I was. I couldn't even explain why it bothered me so much.
Another thing that didn't make me happy was Gale. He did not mesh at all with the Gale in my head and his relationship with Katniss was glossed over at best. I know there is a time limit on a movie, but this is a huge factor in the book and becomes even more important later on. I don't think people who haven't read the book would even get how close he and Katniss really are. But then again, there are several things that are just thrown in to stay true to the book, but don't really seem to fit in the movie.
There are tons of other tiny things that bothered me, but none actually affected the quality of the movie. If I wasn't comparing the movie to the book then there wouldn't even be a "thumbs down" section. The movie was absolutely great. But it's impossible to make a movie live up to a 5 star book. I guess that's a good problem to have though.
No comments have been added yet.
