Hunger Games

[shmokes]

Oh yeah, I meant to mention. This is awesome.

[Vigo]

fyi- saw this on Slickdeals this morning:

Link

The Hunger Games Series eBooks: The Hunger Games $0.83, The Hunger Games: Movie Tie-In Edition $0.83, Catching Fire $1.16, Mockingjay $1.07

Kobobooks has great prices on Hunger Games Series eBooks. Use promo code hungergamesdeal. Thanks wi22ard

Note: Code is limited to one Hunger Games eBook.

Prices after promo code
Hunger Games $0.83
The Hunger Games: Movie Tie-In Edition $0.83
Catching Fire $1.16
Mockingjay $1.07

I think the file format on these is epub.

[Ed_McCarron]

It reminds me of those star trek scenes when the enterprise gets hit with a torpedo or something

All the actors lean to the left and right in sync?

[kahlid74]

I've read the books and saw the movie and I thought it was a good movie.  I thought Jennifer Lawrence did a great job but I felt that Josh Hutcherson was piss poor as Peeta.

Also, working at a movie theater for 6 years of my life with boat loads of movie undergrad/grad students gave me an interesting perspective on cinematography and lighting.  The camera work was horrible.  I'm hoping they work on that for the next movies.

[stu33]

I saw it last night...I'd like to chime in with my thoughts.  Tried to keep it spoiler-free.

Jennifer Lawrence, I think, nailed it.  She did very well at conveying all the changes that Katniss went through over the course of training and the Games themselves.  Especially during the Games in the book, there's not much dialog but boatloads of exposition and insight into what's happening in Katniss's mind that would have been hard to do without voiceover.  Lawrence was able to show, subtly, the changes in Katniss throughout the games.

The actor that played Peeta wasn't given much to do in the movie.  I can't really knock the kid, although the acting seemed pretty...basic.  Peeta doesn't really get that interesting in the book until quite a ways into it anyway.  Not sure they could have made that work in a movie at all.

The actor that played Gale was terrible, IMO.  Waaaay too emo-y for me.  Without giving anything away, I have trouble seeing how well that will translate as they turn the next two books into movies.

Woody did very well.  I've liked him in most everything, though, so I'm jaded.  Lenny Kravitz was actually VERY good as well.  Kept it extremely low-key.

Also, if you don't like shaky-cam (which I don't), be patient through the beginning.  It's used WAAAAAAAY too much early on.  Like, the first ten whole minutes of the movie.  It backs off considerably and is then used pretty judiciously throughout the rest.

Donald Sutherland wasn't given a ton to do, either, but made the most of it.  Hopefully he's signed as President Snow for the rest of the movies.

[shmokes]

Donald Sutherland wasn't given a ton to do, either, but made the most of it.  Hopefully he's signed as President Snow for the rest of the movies.

I think perhaps that he isn't intent on working much anymore. This has characterized pretty much every role he's had for years. The Italian Job, Pride and Prejudice, and A Time to Kill come immediately to mind, but I'm sure there are others. I seem to only ever see him in very small supporting roles these days, where he might have only two or three scenes in the entire film.

[kahlid74]

Donald Sutherland wasn't given a ton to do, either, but made the most of it.  Hopefully he's signed as President Snow for the rest of the movies.

I think perhaps that he isn't intent on working much anymore. This has characterized pretty much every role he's had for years. The Italian Job, Pride and Prejudice, and A Time to Kill come immediately to mind, but I'm sure there are others. I seem to only ever see him in very small supporting roles these days, where he might have only two or three scenes in the entire film.

Well shinikies he's been acting for 40+ years.  The man deserves a break.  Besides, Kelly's heroes is still his best.

[Trip]

Saw the movie, really liked it, decided to give th books a chance

Book 1 was close to the movie and good, liked how the movie had some behind the scenes stuff that the girl didn't see.  Really didn't like the change they did in the movie for the "finale" where the mutts weren't specific to what the book did.  Book definitely did that better.

Book 2 was ok, there were some flashes of bad story that werent as present in Book 1.

Book 3 was just awful.  It was like living in girl mind for 400 pages.

[Vigo]

Katniss should not have saddlebags.... I thought everyone was supposed to be starving?  Guess that's what you get using Americans.

  I haven't seen the movie yet, but all the photo stills I have seen, I kept thinking why the heck do all the kids from every single district look so damn healthy.

[Samstag]

Just saw this.  The main actors were too old to portray kids.  We recruit younger to shoot women and children in Iraq.  Katniss should not have saddlebags.... I thought everyone was supposed to be starving?  Guess that's what you get using Americans.

She was a hunter.  She caught/shot/foraged enough food to feed her family and trade the excess for other stuff.

[danny_galaga]

A work colleague saw it the other day, and I asked him "I thought this was a kids movie?". He couldn't articulate what demographic it is aimed at, I went and watched it anyway. Yep, it's a kids movie. Not bad mind you, and it was freakin' awesome to see Lenny Kravitz in an acting role. I give it 3/5

my score for recent movies you may have seen:

  5/5 - The Way Back, The Kings Speech, Michael Clayton, In Bruges, Gran Torino, Mary and Max

4.5/5 - Taken, Iron Man, Reign Over Me, Watchmen, The girl with the dragon tattoo

  4/5 - True Grit, Traitor, Bedtime Stories, Sunshine, pineapple express

3.5/5 - 300, Max Payne, You dont mess with the Zohan, Yes Man

  3/5 - That new Indiana Jones flick, Disturbia, That new TMNT flick,

2.5/5 - Angels and Demons

  2/5 - The Love Guru. Note: My 2 is probably someone elses 1. Just leaving room for worse!

[saint]

Anyone else catch she used the wrong side of the knife to saw at the tree limb and notched her arrows the wrong direction more than once?   

I saw the knife thing also and want to look at it again. Don't some knives have a sharp edge, and a serrated edge? Gonna look at that when I get the Blu-Ray.

[Mikezilla]

Katniss should not have saddlebags.... I thought everyone was supposed to be starving?  Guess that's what you get using Americans.

  I haven't seen the movie yet, but all the photo stills I have seen, I kept thinking why the heck do all the kids from every single district look so damn healthy.

Its cause its supposed to rival Twilight. All the damn kids look the same with their stupid hair, and everything.  I still think Katniss has a slight case of down syndrome. 

[ChadTower]

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.

+1000

I read all of the books twice.  Saw the movie two days ago.

I really liked the books.  I wanted to get up and leave this movie it was so bad. 

I agree 100% with saint's assessment of shaky camera work.  I don't get motion sick from it but it annoys the crap out of me.  There is no reason to be watching people ride a train and the camera is shaking.  Ooh, we're walking down a hallway in an emotional moment.  Let's skip the acting and just shake the camera around.  The idea wrecks a whole movie.

Katniss is too old, she very clearly isn't starving, and she has nice clothes.  How does that fit the story at all?  When they finally got around to the bread sequence with Peeta they are the same age.  Katniss isn't starving in the rain, she looks like she got drunk and fell asleep on the ground, and Peeta comes out to judge her.  And it was just last week judging by their age.  That is probably the key element to the entire first book completely botched out of laziness.  Total fail on a character development standpoint.  Especially on Peeta.  Peeta is no longer a kid who took a punch to give some bread, he's no longer a kid who helped the drunk clean himself up, he's just a kid that has a little charisma for the audience.  Katniss is no longer a survivor who kept her family alive.  She's just a hot chick in a village short on them.  Haymitch is no longer a suicidal drunk tormented by his role as Mentor.  He's just a guy with bad hygiene.  Katniss' mom isn't a "middle class" woman who gave up her comfort for a man she loved, and then was crushed by his death, by crippling depression.  She's just a weak woman who can't support her kids.  The whole basis for every main character in this movie is watered down to nothing.  The result is a bunch of cardboard cutouts, a ---steaming pile of meadow muffin--- load of camera shaking, and eventually some CGI pit bulls that even tommy wouldn't like.

I thought this movie was a piece of crap from beginning to end.

[Mikezilla]

You might have just saved me 24 bucks Chad. I enjoyed the books as well, so we probably share the same feelings as to how the characters should be portrayed in the movie. If they are done that poorly, and missing the mark completely, I probably shouldnt see it cause it will ruin the books for me.

[ChadTower]

Wait until it comes out on DVD.  Or get it some other way to watch at home.  Don't spend $24 on it.

I spent $55.   

[Mikezilla]

Maybe Ill get the GF to buy my ticket PBJ, then if I hate it, I would have just wasted hours off my life rather than money. 

Damn dude that sucks. 

Then again, the GF is making me take her to see Titanic in 3D... I should have a few beers before I go so I can fall asleep. 

[stu33]

Then again, the GF is making me take her to see Titanic in 3D... I should have a few beers before I go so I can fall asleep. 

Leave after the 3D boobs.

[Vigo]

 

If you Grab a copy of the VHS for a quarter from your nearby thrift store, you can FF until the boob scene and get the timestamp. Then at the theater you can just run off to the arcade until the time that the 3d boobs come up.

Movie avoided and 3D boobs FTW!

[TheChairmanH2K]

i watched Hunger Games on saturday night.  thats time from my life i will never get back.  this was a terrible movie which makes me not want to venture within ten feet of the books.

[danny_galaga]

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.

I don't get this 

I've seen both movies. Is Hannah a knock off of the book because they both feature a heroine?

[Ginsu Victim]

There's no resemblance between the stories of The Hunger Games and Hanna.

[wp34]

We saw it this weekend.  I liked the movie better than the book.  I enjoyed the books but the writing style is rather annoying.  It was like reading a journal being written in real time.  I tried re-reading it recently and gave up once I got past The Reaping.

I thought the acting was great and the actors were well cast for the most part.  Cato and Peta looked a little too similar at times which got confusing.  I expected to not like Peta from what I've read but I thought he was fine. 

[Trip]

We saw it this weekend.  I liked the movie better than the book.  I enjoyed the books but the writing style is rather annoying.  It was like reading a journal being written in real time.  I tried re-reading it recently and gave up once I got past The Reaping.

The book definitely reads at a very low level and sentence structure is designed to keep children entertained, because the author knows she is competing with xboxs and ipods.  I can see it being a very annoying read for some people.   I know book 3 for me was almost impossible to read and I had to force my way through it.  I hope the movie is done better, but since the author is adapting the books to screenplays herself, I don't hold out much hope.

[wp34]

I know book 3 for me was almost impossible to read and I had to force my way through it.  I hope the movie is done better, but since the author is adapting the books to screenplays herself, I don't hold out much hope.

I had to skim the 3rd book as well.  I also was dissapointed to see her name all over the credits.  I was hoping the 2nd and especially 3rd book would get some tweaking for the movies.

OT - They showed the trailer for the new Twilight movie before Hunger Games.  Looks like it is going to be a comedy.   

[ChadTower]

The book is young adult reading.  It is intentionally written at a middle school reading level.   

[wp34]

The book is young adult reading.  It is intentionally written at a middle school reading level.   

Agreed.  But it could have been written better anyway.  JK Rowling was able to make her books compelling and interesting to readers of all ages.

[ChadTower]

Agreed.  But it could have been written better anyway.  JK Rowling was able to make her books compelling and interesting to readers of all ages.

Content doesn't address reading level.  Her books aren't any more advanced than the Hunger Games books.  They're just better stories.

[Mikezilla]

There's no resemblance between the stories of The Hunger Games and Hanna.

The trailers for Hanna made it look like the whole thing was her fighting for her life in the woods.  The actual movie, of course, was all weird and made no actual sense and seemed to involve the same 2 or 3 city blocks they kept trying to pass off as different countries.

Hanna sucked.

[shmokes]

Agreed.  But it could have been written better anyway.  JK Rowling was able to make her books compelling and interesting to readers of all ages.

Content doesn't address reading level.  Her books aren't any more advanced than the Hunger Games books.  They're just better stories.

I doubt this. While I haven't read The Hunger Games, I think the concept of Harry Potter, an 11-year-old kid who finds out he's a wizard, is far more juvenile than the dystopian future of the Hunger Games. The Harry Potter books, while not especially literary, are pretty well written, far moreso than Dan Brown's novels or most John Grisham.

[Hoopz]

Grisham's first few novels were great.  Thought provoking, deep and entertaining.  The Chamber, in particular, stands out in his first set.

Once he started popping books out every couple of weeks, they turned to fluff.  Just garbage.  The last couple I read, I kept waiting for the arc in the story.  Never happened.

Dan Brown's are worse.  The stupid helicopter scene in Angels and Demons is just idiotic.

[ChadTower]

I doubt this. While I haven't read The Hunger Games, I think the concept of Harry Potter, an 11-year-old kid who finds out he's a wizard, is far more juvenile than the dystopian future of the Hunger Games. The Harry Potter books, while not especially literary, are pretty well written, far moreso than Dan Brown's novels or most John Grisham.

Helped you out a bit clarifying your position on the Hunger Games' quality of writing.

Not to mention that I was talking about the difficulty level of reading it and not the content involved.

[Malenko]

I prefer the original:

[ChadTower]

Let's be real about this.

[Trip]

Content doesn't address reading level.  Her books aren't any more advanced than the Hunger Games books.  They're just better stories.

JK does have a much better grasp at storytelling, she could use a lot of work on her battle sequences though.  Her stories lost a lot of steam when it came time to write a battle.  The movies did some better and some worse than her version, so they didn't do much better overall.

[ChadTower]

Reading level:  Grammatic structure, complexity of analogies, direct/indirect vocabulary usage, average number of syllables and clauses per sentence and/or paragraph.

It's not about the story or how effectively the story is told.

The irony here is making my foot twitch.

[Donkbaca]

The book is published by SCHOLASTIC people, its marketed towards little kids, its silly to see middle aged fat guys argue about the literary importance of a book written for 13 year old girls.

3D Titanic?  Sure there's boobs, but if I am going to sit through that mess, I would expect better hotness than a naked Kate Winslett

[shmokes]

Helped you out a bit clarifying your position on the Hunger Games' quality of writing.

How exactly does quoting me word-for-word clarify my position?

Anyway, I believe that the Hunger Games are not well-written books because my wife has read them and I've listened to her frequently describing the stupidity of various situations and the often crappy writing. And I've read quite a few excerpts illustrating as much (at my wife's prompting). My wife compares them qualitatively to The Twilight Saga, i.e., mostly crappy.

So yeah, my opinion is not based on having read the series. Perhaps that's why I prefaced everything I said with, "While I haven't read The Hunger Games . . ." And then I only talked about the premise of the novel, which I don't have to have read the books to know.

It's rich criticism, at any rate, coming from BYOAC's resident expert in everything known to man (except loading MDF).

 

[ChadTower]

Clarification was emphasis put on the fact that you didn't actually read the books but have a strong opinion on them based on what you've heard.  You did not present the opinion as that of your wife at the time.  Now, your position is clearer.  You're welcome.   

It undermines the credibility of the opinion, of course.  Then you throw in indignance and an insult to make it that much stronger a position.  Good work!  

[shmokes]

I doubt this. While I haven't read The Hunger Games, I think the concept of Harry Potter, an 11-year-old kid who finds out he's a wizard, is far more juvenile than the dystopian future of the Hunger Games. The Harry Potter books, while not especially literary, are pretty well written, far moreso than Dan Brown's novels or most John Grisham.

You're silly Chad. Read that again. How in the name of god is that an unreasonable thing to say? How can you even clarify it as a "strong opinion". Don't be a princess.