The Hunger Games

A month ago you could have told me The Hunger Games was about a hot dog eating contest and I would have believed you (while being confused about all the birds on the covers). But after watching some of the trailers for the movie, and getting some information about the plot, I figured I would give into the hype.

I remember a few people from my section in teacher's college reading the books when they first came out a couple years ago, and thinking it didn't sound like it would be for me. I never got into the Harry Potter or Twilight series (though I have seen the movies) and figured it would be another thing like those. Plus, I hate being held hostage by books; that "one more chapter" feeling that turns into all night. I'll be honest, I haven't read a novel in probably a year. The last one was The Book of Negroes. It was good enough to finish, but not captivating enough that I couldn't put it down to sleep. Which brings us back to The Hunger Games...

I bought the boxed set on Amazon for about $30 including shipping and tax, which I thought was a good deal. It came in on the Tuesday, I finished the first one on the Wednesday, and the last two by the Sunday. (The movie came out that Friday, but I didn't see it until this past Wednesday.) Needless to say I was held hostage by these books. I really liked the themes and philosophical insights, there were some very likable characters, and it was, what I think could be, a warning for the future. I would have preferred the books to be a little older, as I am a little older (than the target audience) some more depth and detail would have satiated my interest in this future society. And the love thing confused me. I know it's not a romance, but either be a romance, or don't be a romance! What's with all these random kisses!?

Anyways, off to the movies I went with a pair of friends. Being that I had only just finished the books I had a hard time separating it from the movie. I know I was filling in the gaps and details from the book that were left out in the movie, making it seem like the movie made more sense than it did. If I hadn't read the books, I would have still enjoyed the movie, but there is a definite benefit to being able to make the connections that the movie doesn't make implicit.

I really appreciated the direction the director took for the movie, it didn't seem too polished, the cinematography was rough and wobbly at times which contributed to an almost reality tv feel at times. For example, when she is in the tree, the background is out of focus and the camera angle is like if we were looking up at her from the ground. Little things like that just give it a more authentic feel.

Additionally, the movie is extremely well-cast. Jennifer Lawrence is perfect as Katniss. There are definitely sparks of Peeta's charisma in Josh Hutcherson, but I would have liked to have seen more. I'm not sure if Liam Helmsworth is good-looking enough to be Gale, I'll have to wait for the subsequent movies before I decide on him. Elizabeth Banks was a great Effie, but I am also undecided on Woody Harrelson as Haymitch. I would have preferred him more surly. I really liked the idea of Lenny Kravtiz as Cinna, but I didn't think the movie did him justice by developing his relationship with Katniss enough. I'm a huge Donald Sutherland fan, and I think he will be the perfect President Snow in the next two movies. Stanley Tucci can do no wrong, and as Caesar, he delivers.

I liked the idea of including the Gamemakers more for the movie, those scenes helped to give the audience more information that would have been difficult to transpose from the first person narrator of the books, to a movie. With that being said, like most books to movies, there were definitely lots of details that were left out. I'm trying to think of examples to make this post more legit, but I can't, I should take notes whilst watching movies. The details that did make the cut (aka the entire plot of the movie) were pretty true to the story. There was definitely some differences (here's a link to a post analyzing some of the major differences) between the book and movie, but none I was really outraged about. I was not tempted to yell out in the theatre "but in the book ...!".

I want to wrap this up, but I should say something about violence first...

There has been a lot of talk about the age appropriateness of The Hunger Games. I read an article in the Toronto Star last week about what age kids should be reading this at. The general feel was that depending on the reader, grade 7 was probably a safe bet. Don't get me wrong, the books are definitely violent, and I would say the first one is probably the least so, but there is definitely a difference between reading about something and seeing it in front of you. I think the movie was successful in the amount of violence and brutality it chose to show. I am not ruling out that I am pretty desensitized to this sort of stuff, like most of us are, and I am not a tween or teen, and don't think like one, or internalize content like one. So I'm not going to say let all your twelve-year-olds go see this, but based on the book, I found the use of violence in the movie to be appropriate.

Overall, the movie wasn't as epic as I hoped it would be. Reading the book definitely helps the movie make more sense, but it does an adequate job, and I think fans of the book will be satisfied. I would need to see it again, though, to better form my thoughts on it.

 This movie made me shed exactly two tears.