Hunger Games

[Ginsu Victim]

Enjoyed it. Haven't read the book, but thought the movie was pretty good.

Pic I just submitted to reddit:

http://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/rc0da/hunger_games_cake_decorator_fx_wiz/

[upprc04]

I also read the books and enjoyed them.  It kind of goes downhill, but the next two are still pretty good.  I felt like they dragged on some parts and then all of sudden would rush through a major point. 

I read they were splitting it in to 4 movies.  I can't believe they will be able to do that.  I'm surprised the first book is a 2+ hour movie.  I'm planning on seeing it next week. 

[wp34]

I also thought that the plot of one good size novel was stretched across three books unnecessarily, and was initially surprised they're splitting it into three movies. 

+1

I've not made it to the movie yet but I've read the books.  I really liked the first book but the 2nd and 3rd were a bit weak.  Would have been better as one tight book.

I've heard that they may actually stretch it into four movies somehow.

[Generic Eric]

I like the movie well enough to buy the book.   There is a neat article on i09; What if Roger Corman or Alfred Hitchcock directed The Hunger Games?

With already 74 seasons of the Hunger Games completed, they have a bunch of room for the "history" to be filled in.   I haven't read the first book, let alone the rest, but I am curious to know how Woody made his kills.  If the movies do well enough I can see this getting syndicated.  Maybe Fox will pick it up and cancel it after its a hit. 

[DaOld Man]

I have read all three books, have not seen the movie yet.
I agree with you guys, all 3 could have been one, but I liked them.

[Vigo]

I am almost through the second book and haven't seen the movie yet. The books are entertaining, but they seem to be getting more predictable. The pacing getting much worse as well. If feels like they can spend an entire page talking about eating a meal of biscuits and squirrel, and then a serious part of the story gets skimmed over in a couple sentences. I'm a sucker for dystopians so I won't complain too loudly, but the plot is really nothing original and laced with tween romance. Still, I really am looking forward to seeing the movie. I hear Donald Sutherland and Woody Harrelson are both in it.

[saint]

Read all 3 books a while back, then saw the movie yesterday. Thought the movie was well done and faithful to the book.

Two complaints (no spoilers):

1. Camera work was a bit Blair-Witch style. If you get motion sick at such things (I do, yay ) then beware. An hour later I still felt icky.

2. Followed the book really well, but it could have used more time to explain some of the backstory leading to the various sequence of events -- that would have made it even longer of course. Still a good movie, but I highly recommend reading the book first.

Really good movie.

[wp34]

To those that have seen it how was Harrelson?  I always pictured Kevin Costner in the role while reading.

[Donkbaca]

My friend: "You should read these Hunger Games books"
Me: "No, I'm not interested in reading teenage girl survival sci-fi"
Friend: "Its not just for kids"
Me: "My niece reads them, the heoine is a teenage girl"
Friend: "adults enjoy them too"
Me: "Its published by Scholastic..."

I'll take your words for it...

[saint]

It's actually not teenage angst survival at all. If you're thinking it's another twilight, it's not. No skin off my nose per se if you don't want to read it, but you're missing out on a pretty compelling read. I was reluctant, was talked into reading the first book finally by my wife and kids (of both genders), and finally did. Immediately read books 2 and 3 afterwards.

[knave]

I'm going to go read these now. My daughter has all three...

[saint]

Harrelson:

Spoiler:
He was fine in the role, but they minimized his part. Part of the back story I wish they'd expanded on.

[Rando]

I haven't seen the movie, but I have seen (and read the Manga version) of Battle Royale, which this movie/story is getting a lot of flack for sounding really similar to.  I loved Battle Royale and am hesitant to see this, and the note above about some shakey camera work will probably prevent my wife from being able to watch it.

Anyone else who has seen (and liked) Battle Royale AND this care to comment?

[Green Giant]

Saw the movie Saturday night.  I thought it was great.

Never read the books.  I had a semblance of an idea of the story after a friend at work told me about it.  I don't really care how the stories went or how the books were written because the movie was very well put together.

I don't see how they could have forced anything else into the movie, but it sounds like the book may have gone into to much detail or something.  I have to disagree that there was shaky blair witch style camera work.  I don't remember it ever being like that.  There were quick action scenes, but the vast majority of the movie is much smoother flowing.

I liked Woody as well.  His character was a little rough around the edges but you can start to like him as it progresses along.  Walking out of the movie, my wife and I had no complaints at all.  Only questions about what the next two movies will be about.

[saint]

I have to disagree that there was shaky blair witch style camera work.  I don't remember it ever being like that.  There were quick action scenes, but the vast majority of the movie is much smoother flowing.

Depends on how susceptible you are to problems with motion. I guarantee you the camera work was shaky and if you're susceptible it's going to bother you a lot. If you're not I doubt it bothers you at all, it wasn't shaky as Blair Witch. I couldn't watch more than 30 seconds of Blair Witch without being almost violently ill (sucks a lot btw), but I was able to grit my teeth and watch Hunger Games. However, if you are at all susceptible, it'll bother you and if you're more than a little bit then you'll have a problem.

If you've ever been riding in the back of a car and gotten motion sick, that's the feeling.

[Ginsu Victim]

BTW, the pic I posted above was number 1 in the movies subreddit and number 2 for ALL of reddit. That made me happy. I've also found many blogs that have reposted it.

[saint]

I don't mean to harp on it, but if you get bothered by shaky camera work it can really make you sick, so it's worth noting for anyone in that boat. Anyway, I'm not the only one who noticed...


https://www.google.com/#hl=en&safe=off&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=hunger+games+movie+camera+work

[saint]

BTW, the pic I posted above was number 1 in the movies subreddit and number 2 for ALL of reddit. That made me happy. I've also found many blogs that have reposted it.

Heh. Have an upboat. 

[saint]

Heh, OK I'm *really* not trying to harp on how I thought the camerawork was, but saw this today:

Insight in to how The Hunger Games were filmed.

[SNAAKE]

^ thats the official j j abrams camera

[Green Giant]

I don't mean to harp on it, but if you get bothered by shaky camera work it can really make you sick, so it's worth noting for anyone in that boat. Anyway, I'm not the only one who noticed...


https://www.google.com/#hl=en&safe=off&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=hunger+games+movie+camera+work

After reading some of the comments, I think one guy really nailed it.

"The camera shake is similar to the Bourne movies. When there's action there's more shake to imply the energy of what's happening."

I think that sums it up best.  It isn't like you will puke, but I guess some parts moved quick, however you are so ingrained in the movie you don't notice unless you are an old man like saint. 

[saint]

I think that sums it up best.  It isn't like you will puke, but I guess some parts moved quick, however you are so ingrained in the movie you don't notice unless you are an old man like saint. 

Heh. Dude, started in my 20's and gets worse as I get older. No first person shooters for me. Barf city.

[SNAAKE]

^ I always had it too. just didn't know about it. back in the day I played medal of honor like 2 levels at a time then wondered why I felt like throwing up and had to take a nap

its worse now. I get headache just from watching call of doodoo 3493454 videos.

[Vigo]

Shakey cam doesn't make me sick, but annoys the crap out of me. It is about the most overused filming technique out there too. It reminds me of those star trek scenes when the enterprise gets hit with a torpedo or something, but it just keeps going on and on and on...

[Donkbaca]

all the degenerate, home made amateur porn I have watched has made me immune to the shaky camera... or something like that

[shmokes]

I haven't read the books, but my wife has, and from what she describes, they sound pretty poor. She also pointed out that they are a single book. It's such a ripoff when authors do this. I'm afraid Quentin Terantino invented the concept with Kill Bill (which sucks, cos I love that movie). Your ---smurfing--- work has to be complete. It has to be able to exist on its own. You can't just ---smurfing--- sell a 1/3 completed novel at retail. Except you apparently can now. Which sucks.

J.K. Rowling actually understands this. Her series is a long story arc, but each novel is complete on its own.

Anyway, my impression is that the books are about John Grisham quality (read: pretty crappy), and the movie is quite good.

[Ginsu Victim]

I'm afraid Quentin Tarantino invented the concept with Kill Bill.

He wanted one full length film, but Miramax balked at the idea. When "The Whole Bloody Affair" gets released, we will finally see the version of the film he originally intended.

[Vigo]

I'm afraid Quentin Tarantino invented the concept with Kill Bill.

He wanted one full length film, but Miramax balked at the idea. When "The Whole Bloody Affair" gets released, we will finally see the version of the film he originally intended.

Beat me to it. Yeah, the whole kill bill was filmed and in editing before Tarantino compromised and agreed to split it up to save it from getting chopped up.

Just finished book 2 of the hunger games. I am getting annoyed with the authors redundant vocabulary.  I should have kept a running tally of how many times she uses the word "temple" for the side of the head.

[EightBySix]

all the degenerate, home made amateur porn I have watched has made me immune to the shaky camera... or something like that

Are you sure it was the camera that was shaking, or the desk your monitor is on? 

[Vigo]

I haven't read the books, but my wife has, and from what she describes, they sound pretty poor. She also pointed out that they are a single book. It's such a ripoff when authors do this. I'm afraid Quentin Terantino invented the concept with Kill Bill (which sucks, cos I love that movie). Your ---smurfing--- work has to be complete. It has to be able to exist on its own. You can't just ---smurfing--- sell a 1/3 completed novel at retail. Except you apparently can now. Which sucks.

Been thinking about this comment a bit. I know what you mean about Hollywood milking movies for every dollar and unnecessarily splitting things up, and this seems to be the case for the film. From what I read so far, I think that the series just seems like it could be rounded up into a single movie without screwing things up. The books simply are not plot-filled enough to need to preserve the complete unabridged story for the film.

I don't think that this is an issue with the books though. Each book is almost 400 pages, and they do find an ending point between books, even if it is a bit of a cliffhanger on the 2nd book. However, that is really nothing new to books at all. In the Lord of the rings, the whole first book really resolves nothing. They realize they have to destroy the ring, create a fellowship to carry that out, and then the fellowship repeatedly gets busted to pieces and the book ends with the Sam and Frodo running off alone. It is totally an incomplete story by itself.

[Hoopz]

In the Lord of the rings, the whole first book really resolves nothing. They realize they have to destroy the ring, create a fellowship to carry that out, and then the fellowship repeatedly gets busted to pieces and the book ends with the Sam and Frodo running off alone. It is totally an incomplete story by itself.

WTF VIGO?  Ever hear of the spoiler tag?  DAMMIT!  Another book ruined.


































 

[shmokes]

In the Lord of the rings, the whole first book really resolves nothing. They realize they have to destroy the ring, create a fellowship to carry that out, and then the fellowship repeatedly gets busted to pieces and the book ends with the Sam and Frodo running off alone. It is totally an incomplete story by itself.

I dunno. It's been too long. I don't remember Fellowship of the Ring seeming incomplete. The Game of Thrones series, on the other hand, is awful. When I was about 4/5 through the book I was like, "WTF? If the author intends to wind up all these story lines he's opened, he better get moving." The the book just abruptly ended. I was pissed. It wasn't even a very good book and now, if I wanted to find out ANYTHING I had to get the next one. The book just ---smurfing--- stops. Absolutely nothing is resolved. But if Tolkien is guilty, he's guilty. It's bad writing, and commercially it basically amounts to bait-and-switch.

[lordnacho]

Shakey cam doesn't make me sick, but annoys the crap out of me. It is about the most overused filming technique out there too. It reminds me of those star trek scenes when the enterprise gets hit with a torpedo or something, but it just keeps going on and on and on...

It's so much more apparent if you have it on mute.  Had sound off once for Diners, Drive-ins and Dives (cooking show), the filming is insanely annoying.  Quick zooming in on a guy throwing paprika into a pot.  I was getting nauseus and hungry at the same time.

[Green Giant]

I haven't read the books, but my wife has, and from what she describes, they sound pretty poor. She also pointed out that they are a single book. It's such a ripoff when authors do this. I'm afraid Quentin Terantino invented the concept with Kill Bill (which sucks, cos I love that movie). Your ---smurfing--- work has to be complete. It has to be able to exist on its own. You can't just ---smurfing--- sell a 1/3 completed novel at retail. Except you apparently can now. Which sucks.

Been thinking about this comment a bit. I know what you mean about Hollywood milking movies for every dollar and unnecessarily splitting things up, and this seems to be the case for the film. From what I read so far, I think that the series just seems like it could be rounded up into a single movie without screwing things up. The books simply are not plot-filled enough to need to preserve the complete unabridged story for the film.

I don't think that this is an issue with the books though. Each book is almost 400 pages, and they do find an ending point between books, even if it is a bit of a cliffhanger on the 2nd book. However, that is really nothing new to books at all. In the Lord of the rings, the whole first book really resolves nothing. They realize they have to destroy the ring, create a fellowship to carry that out, and then the fellowship repeatedly gets busted to pieces and the book ends with the Sam and Frodo running off alone. It is totally an incomplete story by itself.

Having seen the movie, I have to disagree with that one.

Like I said, my knowledge of the books is what is posted on wikipedia, but the movie was very well done.  I really don't see how they could incorporate the remainder of what I read on wikipedia into a single movie without it seeming like Spiderman 3.

At no point in the movie was I getting annoyed and wanting them to speed it up.  It isn't like watching Drive, god what a crappy movie that was.  And actually they did a really good job of wrapping up the movie.  It could easily have ended and be done.  There are no holes left at the end of the movie you want answered.  If I didn't know there were 2 more movies I wouldn't have known they would be making several more movies in the series.

[Mikezilla]

I haven't read the books, but my wife has, and from what she describes, they sound pretty poor. She also pointed out that they are a single book. It's such a ripoff when authors do this. I'm afraid Quentin Terantino invented the concept with Kill Bill (which sucks, cos I love that movie). Your ---smurfing--- work has to be complete. It has to be able to exist on its own. You can't just ---smurfing--- sell a 1/3 completed novel at retail. Except you apparently can now. Which sucks.

Been thinking about this comment a bit. I know what you mean about Hollywood milking movies for every dollar and unnecessarily splitting things up, and this seems to be the case for the film. From what I read so far, I think that the series just seems like it could be rounded up into a single movie without screwing things up. The books simply are not plot-filled enough to need to preserve the complete unabridged story for the film.

I don't think that this is an issue with the books though. Each book is almost 400 pages, and they do find an ending point between books, even if it is a bit of a cliffhanger on the 2nd book. However, that is really nothing new to books at all. In the Lord of the rings, the whole first book really resolves nothing. They realize they have to destroy the ring, create a fellowship to carry that out, and then the fellowship repeatedly gets busted to pieces and the book ends with the Sam and Frodo running off alone. It is totally an incomplete story by itself.

Having seen the movie, I have to disagree with that one.

Like I said, my knowledge of the books is what is posted on wikipedia, but the movie was very well done.  I really don't see how they could incorporate the remainder of what I read on wikipedia into a single movie without it seeming like Spiderman 3.

At no point in the movie was I getting annoyed and wanting them to speed it up.  It isn't like watching Drive, god what a crappy movie that was.  And actually they did a really good job of wrapping up the movie.  It could easily have ended and be done.  There are no holes left at the end of the movie you want answered.  If I didn't know there were 2 more movies I wouldn't have known they would be making several more movies in the series.

I wish they would have done that with the Matrix, just left it at the first one and forget about the rest of the crap. I read all 3 books in 3 days and I found them pretty entertaining. It was predictable, but like Vigo said, I love a good dystopian novel. I enjoyed them, I was wondering how they were going to handle the killings and violence though, I hate stuff watered down. I also didnt agree with 90% of the casting. Woody Harrelson, and Lenny Kravitz were not who I was picturing in my head while reading the book. Same with Rue, and a bunch of the tributes. I think they got Katniss, and Gale down though. Peeta is a joke. The dude is a midget in real life. I cant get over it. The gf and I will probably check it out this weekend. Everyone, whether read the books or not, said it was a good movie.

I just hope I dont barf. I get neauseous if I sit in the back seat of a long car ride. 

[shmokes]

That chick from Hanna (crappy movie that started out with lots of potential) is an awesome actress. So is Jennifer Lawrence, though, so shrug. I haven't read the books so I have no issues with her age. And, almost without exception, I'd rather they up the age of a character for a movie rather than stay faithful and use untalented child actors. Take Ender's Game, for example. Imagine trying to do that movie while staying faithful to the character being six/seven years old. It'd be absurdly bad. Ender will be twelve in the movie and probably played by a fourteen-year-old.

[wp34]

Take Ender's Game, for example. Imagine trying to do that movie while staying faithful to the character being six/seven years old. It'd be absurdly bad. Ender will be twelve in the movie and probably played by a fourteen-year-old.

Agreed. I don't think that movie could be made any other way. 

[Vigo]

I dunno. It's been too long. I don't remember Fellowship of the Ring seeming incomplete.

I think Fellowship was incomplete in itself, but it was so ridiculously good that you were OK with being left hanging. Hunger games you just want more to happen so when it cuts out for the next book, you would end up feeling dissapointed if you didn't have the second/third book in hand already.

Having seen the movie, I have to disagree with that one.

Like I said, my knowledge of the books is what is posted on wikipedia, but the movie was very well done.  I really don't see how they could incorporate the remainder of what I read on wikipedia into a single movie without it seeming like Spiderman 3.

I still haven't read the third book, so you may be right. The first book can be film worthy on its own, and all the reviews seem to confirm that it is. The second book, to me, doesn't seem too deserving of it's own film. To go to Mike's comparison, it would probably end up like a Matrix 2, some action and entertainment, but not much plot and a cliffhanger ending. Until I read the 3rd book, I can't say whether the 3rd should be made into a film either.

I also didnt agree with 90% of the casting. Woody Harrelson, and Lenny Kravitz were not who I was picturing in my head while reading the book. Same with Rue, and a bunch of the tributes. I think they got Katniss, and Gale down though. Peeta is a joke. The dude is a midget in real life. I cant get over it.

I agree. I can't say for sure how the actors will do, but when I read Lenny Kravitz was Cinna, I was laughing about it. I really like Woody Harrelson, but I don't see him being able to pull off all the angles of Haymitch's character. For the tributes in general, I was thinking more Lord of the Flies than Twilight, but I guess I am not the targeted audience. I am Sure Donald Sutherland could make a badass Snow even though he is pretty much a non-character in the first book.

[Mikezilla]

I thought Jennifer Lawrence was way too old for the main actress, to be honest.  I figured that weird looking kid from City of Ember might work, but then she's already been in a Hunger Games knock off called Hannah.

Jennifer Lawrences' eyes bug me.

[CWorley]

I haven't seen the movie, but I have seen (and read the Manga version) of Battle Royale, which this movie/story is getting a lot of flack for sounding really similar to.  I loved Battle Royale and am hesitant to see this, and the note above about some shakey camera work will probably prevent my wife from being able to watch it.

Anyone else who has seen (and liked) Battle Royale AND this care to comment?

I've seen and read them both.  While I enjoyed the Battle Royale novel (not sure if it's different than the Manga version) more than the Hunger Games books, I didn't care at all for the Battle Royale movie.  There were way to many plot points changed from the book and not for the better.  I think the Hunger Games movie does much better in capturing the spirit of the book than BR.