I didn't really notice the shaky camera all that much. It fit the movie pretty well
During the arena the camera was good
But why were they shaking the camera THE WHOLE TIME?
[QUOTE=Gmod4ever;35436485]I haven't read the books yet (definitely want to, after watching the movie, though), but I really liked it.
My only issue was that I wish the movie spent more time explaining the back story. Who are these people? Where do they live? What spawned these districts? Why are they split as they are? Why twelve districts? Who are the administrators? What did they administrate? Why are they in power? What is the capital city? Where is this city, compared to the districts? Why is it so much better than the districts? Who did the districts rebel against? Why did they rebel? Did they lose (I assume so, since the movie starts by saying the Hunger Games are their penance for rebelling)?
The biggest question for me, though, was "What is the point of the Hunger Games?"
I mean, what is the point in competing in them? If you win, what do you get? It said something like riches and fame, but the guy who mentors Katniss and Peeta was someone who won the Hunger Games (unless I am really mistaken), and it seemed the only thing he got out of it was enough booze to become perpetually smashed. He didn't seem to be living the "rich and famous" life to me.
I know that somewhere the administration-y guys say that the Hunger Games is for hope, but honestly, I don't see how the Hunger Games builds up any sort of hope. I mean, having to live in fear every year that you or one of your friends will be picked to be murdered on television isn't exactly cheering to me, especially since you'll have to kill someone whose probably your friend (since normally it's only one winner, as opposed to the two winners they did for Katniss and Peeta).
So yeah, my only issues with the film were in that the film didn't really explain the background to the story. I never really noticed the "shaky cam" a lot of people complain about. But then, I'm one of those few people who enjoy handycam films like Cloverfield, so maybe that had something to do with it. :v:[/QUOTE]
You could have maybe used a few spoiler tags, but that's not very important because your questions are mostly vague. And for your questions: The Capitol and the districts got into a war, the districts lost [sp]there's actually 13 of them, you learn more about the 13th in the other books[/sp], and as punishment the capitol created the hunger games. The books don't really give an idea of where the districts are, except vague suggestions, like factories and forests. The Capitol is superior in technology and... stuff? I dunno.
The districts haven't rebelled yet, I don't believe, and the [sp]riot scene in the movie is supposed to happen in Catching Fire[/sp]. The point of the Hunger Games was basically payment to the Capitol for losing the war, and for their own amusement. If everyone refused to compete in the games at one time, I'm pretty sure all the districts involved would be severely punished. You win, you basically get enough money to hold you and your family for life, and your district gets supplied with [b]tons[/b] of rich foods once a month. Katniss' and Peeta's mentor was rich and famous, but he drinks as a result of the games. It's easier explained in the books, but Katniss and Peeta get nightmares a lot from the games, and we are left to assume that Haymitch deals with his nightmares by drinking.
And finally, the capitol saying the Hunger Games is for hope is a whole lot of propaganda B.S., and is basically them rubbing it in the districts' faces that they lost the war.
[QUOTE=supersocko;35448785]
The districts haven't rebelled yet, I don't believe, and the [sp]riot scene in the movie is supposed to happen in Catching Fire[/sp]. [/QUOTE]
No, Katniss finds out [sp]about the riot in Catching Fire.[/sp]
[QUOTE=Roukan;35457501]No, Katniss finds out [sp]about the riot in Catching Fire.[/sp][/QUOTE]
Oh. I thought [sp]that's when it actually happens, because it wasn't really mentioned until then.[/sp] My bad.
Apparently Gary Ross is not going to direct Catching Fire.
I don't mind. Nothing special about his directing anyways. Maybe there will be less shaky-cam.
I agree that his directing was merely adequate at best. It's kind of amazing that a story with such visual potential looks so drab. Even super cheap budgeted movies like Paranormal Activity have directors who find ways to create memorable images, yet this guy with this story and budget didn't really create anything iconic in terms of visuals.
I agree, the scenes could look more "epic", especially [sp]Rue's death[/sp]. You could say it'd throw people off, and break the atmosphere that makes the movie kind of believable, but then again, most people in the theater have never seen someone they love [sp]get killed with a spear[/sp]
[QUOTE=cecilbdemodded;35462879]I agree that his directing was merely adequate at best. It's kind of amazing that a story with such visual potential looks so drab. Even super cheap budgeted movies like Paranormal Activity have directors who find ways to create memorable images, yet this guy with this story and budget didn't really create anything iconic in terms of visuals.[/QUOTE]
I thought quite a few of the bits in District 12 and The Capital were memorable. Once they got into the games the visuals were less impressive but that's because it was a bunch of teenagers running around a generic forest. It's done in the style of a reality TV show, so naturally they aren't focused on visuals, they're focused on events and drama.
Now that I watched it for a second time, there's this one fucking scene that bothers me a lot. The flashback of Katniss laying on the dirt and Peeta throwing her the loaf of bread. It's just so fucking lazy. and shitty. In the books [sp]Katniss was 12 in the flashback, she had been starving for days now, trying to look for something to eat around in town, her father had recently died and Peeta was 12 too. he comes out the shop, sees her and throws the bread at her. She picks it up and eats, but she felt so stupid and weak that from then on, she taught herself to hunt to provide for her family[/sp] they didn't even bother looking for a younger Katniss, they just used Jennifer even though they were having a hard time making her look 16 when she's actually 21. Dumb direction decision.
The scene was badly conveyed but there wasn't really a much better way to do it, short of finding a younger actor. It's one of those things that suffer from having no narration.
[QUOTE=darkrei9n;35283256]I really want to read the books now. Anyone have a list of the books?[/QUOTE]
The Hunger Games
Catching Fire
Mockingjay
I got mine at a bookstore for about 10-15 bucks, new copy.
[QUOTE=RockmanYoshi;35465104]The Hunger Games
Catching Fire
Mockingjay
I got mine at a bookstore for about 10-15 bucks, new copy.[/QUOTE]
I got The Hunger Games for ten bucks, new. The others are around 20, new.
i saw this movie, and it sucked.
like literally, the camera shakiness was the worst aspect as well as the lack of character in almost all the characters other than katniss.
generally everybody was really unlikeable.
2/10
[QUOTE=BeardyDuck;35466346]generally everybody was really unlikeable.[/QUOTE]
It's a movie about a bunch of sociopath teenagers trying to murder each other.
I think you're missing the point if you're complaining that you didn't like them enough.
I loved the movie. Especially the representation of the Capitol, I thought it was pretty accurate.
However the ending didn't properly capture their victory the way the book did. It ended too fast.
Overall it's a solid 9/10
Saw this tonight, it was better than what i've read of the book but still not great.
Way to set up an incredibly interesting moral dilemma (essentially: would you kill mostly innocent people, potentially including your friends, for the sake of your self and your family) and then completely ignore it.
5/10
[editline]9th April 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=barttool;35464375]Now that I watched it for a second time, there's this one fucking scene that bothers me a lot. The flashback of Katniss laying on the dirt and Peeta throwing her the loaf of bread. It's just so fucking lazy. and shitty. In the books [sp]Katniss was 12 in the flashback, she had been starving for days now, trying to look for something to eat around in town, her father had recently died and Peeta was 12 too. he comes out the shop, sees her and throws the bread at her. She picks it up and eats, but she felt so stupid and weak that from then on, she taught herself to hunt to provide for her family[/sp] they didn't even bother looking for a younger Katniss, they just used Jennifer even though they were having a hard time making her look 16 when she's actually 21. Dumb direction decision.[/QUOTE]
That scene was awful, especially her hurt puppy expression as she looked at him
Also she REALLY didn't look starving (but then neither did anyone else)
[editline]9th April 2012[/editline]
Also it was stupid how everyone rioted after Rue died. Why didn't they do that before? What, the annual kill-children fest finally went too far when it killed a child? And if it [i]did[/i] happen before, why did the cops let them get so far with it? They did a pretty hefty amount of damage, you'd think if that was a regular occurrence the establishment would be more prepared for it.
[editline]9th April 2012[/editline]
Also the whole volunteer system was stupid because the whole point of the hunger games is that it's brutal and unfair - if you're allowing people to volunteer because they [i]want[/i] to fight, and have been trained to do so, that negates the whole thing.
Why would the Capitol allow volunteers? And why, since the Capitol [i]does[/i] allow volunteers, doesn't District 12 prepare for that like some of the other districts?
ALSO why didn't the Capitol let [sp]them commit suicide at the end?[/sp] That would have sent a very clear message that they are not to be fucked with, whereas as it was they just looked like idiots.
[editline]9th April 2012[/editline]
Also they make such a big deal of getting sponsors being the key to winning, and then the sponsors do approximately jack shit.
The Sponsors are the ones who give them shit, such as the burn medicine that helped Katniss survive, and that shit for Peeta, and food. The Sponsors are the only reason Katniss and Peeta survived as long as they did.
As for your point about the end of the games, that's why Seneca, the game master, was [sp]killed[/sp]. He made the Capital look weak.
That one District threw a shit fit when Rue died because it's implied that Rue was pretty widely loved there, and so seeing her killed by some Career Tribute made them go absolutely batshit. The peacekeepers probably didn't see it coming because riots weren't very common.
The volunteer system IS brutal and unfair. It allows the rich warrior children to come in and basically fight for the Capital against the weaker districts. They're the richer and more favored and loyal districts, so the Capital basically lets them get away with cheating. The poorer Districts don't do it because they barely have a regular school system in the first place, let alone some kind of gladiator school.
[QUOTE=Grim Joker;35488433]The Sponsors are the ones who give them shit, such as the burn medicine that helped Katniss survive, and that shit for Peeta, and food. The Sponsors are the only reason Katniss and Peeta survived as long as they did.[/quote]
Well they could have actually mentioned that
The parachutes all came with notes signed "-H" so it's reasonable to assume it was just Haymitch
[quote]As for your point about the end of the games, that's why Seneca, the game master, was [sp]killed[/sp]. He made the Capital look weak.[/quote]
They could have maybe explained that too, and it doesn't change the fact that it was really really dumb
[quote]That one District threw a shit fit when Rue died because it's implied that Rue was pretty widely loved there, and so seeing her killed by some Career Tribute made them go absolutely batshit. The peacekeepers probably didn't see it coming because riots weren't very common.[/quote]
If people were taking your village's children away and murdering them on a yearly basis you would expect people to riot WAY more often than just occasionally. Not to mention the fact that the Capitol was already shitting on their faces to begin with.
[quote]The volunteer system IS brutal and unfair. It allows the rich warrior children to come in and basically fight for the Capital against the weaker districts. They're the richer and more favored and loyal districts, so the Capital basically lets them get away with cheating.[/quote]
OK that helps suppress the poorer districts, but the thing is meant to suppress them all, and it's not doing a very good job of that if it's letting people fight and be killed who already wanted to fight and be killed anyway. It would be far more unfair on all of the districts to just pick people randomly. It is not a punishment to kill people who are willing to risk being killed, whereas it IS a punishment to kill people who are more likely not to be.
[quote]The poorer Districts don't do it because they barely have a regular school system in the first place, let alone some kind of gladiator school.[/quote]
You don't need a gladiator school, just a few martial arts lessons and a bit of training. Then they would have a much better chance of actually winning, and not being so poor any more.
The thing I will give the film credit for is ditching some of the particularly stupid aspects of the book. For example, in the book when Katniss and Peeta are on the rooftop Peeta explains that there is a magic forcefield to stop people jumping off and killing themselves. Then a few scenes later they are given free access to bladed weapons.
But this is all nitpicking. My main problem with it, which I should have expanded on more, was that the film completely ignores what makes the Games terrible and the premise interesting - the moral dilemma between killing innocent people or dying yourself. As soon as the Games begins the participants immediately either die or make it clear that they are either good (Katniss; Rue; Peeta) or evil (the gang of thugs). There are practically no shades of grey and there is very little dilemma. This is such an interesting, complicated and delicate concept and in my opinion they completely over-simplified and mishandled it.
Oh and the other main problem was that the film was just plain not that enjoyable. While it started strong (I was digging it until they went into the actual Games) it just devolved into that one episode of Dollhouse where she gets chased by the crazy guy with the bow.
Except Dollhouse did it better.
It wasn't supposed to explore how the games were horrible and terrible because it's from the point of view of a sixteen year old girl who doesn't give a shit about politics or horror or things like that because she's a complete sociopath. They explore other people's reactions to the games in the other books, but in the first one it's mostly just Katniss wanting to go home.
The premise of the book is not how terrible the Games are. It really isn't. That's a theme, and it's something people discuss a lot, but as far as the first book goes it really isn't a big thing. It's a sucky deal, yes, but it's not like the author goes out of her way to talk about how terrible they are. That's something to do with the setting, too. It's the seventy-somethingth Hunger Games. People are used to it. They accept it. That's part of the horror of the situation. Nobody cares all that much because they've become complacent, and they're used to it. The only people who really care all that much are the people who have personal stakes in it.
It shows Haymitch speaking with the Sponsors right before he sends her the burn medicine, so, you just weren't paying attention for that bit.
They foreshadow the fact that President Snow was going to be pissed about it several times. He tells Seneca that there can only be one winner, no matter what. Seneca was stuck between having two winners or zero winners, and so he picked letting both of them live. This made the Capital look weak, and as such, Seneca paid the price. Snow stressed several times that the Games HAVE to go a certain way, otherwise he'll get really pissed off.
People don't rebel because the last time they rebelled the Capital bombed their asses off. It's a sad situation, but unless it's someone you personally care about you probably don't care all that much. If someone from your town, who you didn't even know, was killed, you wouldn't freak the fuck out, would you?
It's less punishing for the Richer districts, but the richer districts don't need punishing. They've already proven themselves pretty loyal and supportive to the Capital, and as such, they are allowed to bend the rules and have the best tributes.
Nobody in the poorer districts even know how to fight. Katniss's dad knew how to use a bow, but that was for hunting. They don't really try very hard because all of the poorer districts have pretty much lost hope. They all think that there's no way they can win, so they don't try, and they don't get their hopes up for winning.
I get that your opinion is your opinion, but honestly a lot of these issues you have with it can easily be explained by paying closer attention to the movie or putting 2 and 2 together. It just strikes me that you had your mind made up about the movie before you even saw it.
[QUOTE=Grim Joker;35489018]It wasn't supposed to explore how the games were horrible and terrible because it's from the point of view of a sixteen year old girl who doesn't give a shit about politics or horror or things like that because she's a complete sociopath. They explore other people's reactions to the games in the other books, but in the first one it's mostly just Katniss wanting to go home.[/QUOTE]
Yeah that's my problem. [i]I[/i] care about shit like that, and if the movie did it would have been far more interesting (for me).
But yeah whatever, opinions are opinions and all that, I've said as much as I'm going to.
[QUOTE=Negrul1;35489129]Yeah that's my problem. [i]I[/i] care about shit like that, and if the movie did it would have been far more interesting (for me).[/QUOTE]
Well then you and the movie just didn't click on a really fundamental level. You wanted it to explore themes it was never going to.
[QUOTE=Negrul1;35487990]
Also the whole volunteer system was stupid because the whole point of the hunger games is that it's brutal and unfair - if you're allowing people to volunteer because they [i]want[/i] to fight, and have been trained to do so, that negates the whole thing.[/QUOTE]
The thing is that district 1 and 2 are rather allies of the capitol as they're closer to it. [sp]In the last book, they behave as the last line of defense for the capitol, which is in a valley, and the mountains sorrounding it belong to these districts. In these districts is where most peacekeepers (cops) are trained too.[/sp] so they kinda represent the capitol in the games. They're also the wealthiest districts because of their alliance with the capitol, this encourages them to train for the games.
[QUOTE=Negrul1;35487990]Why would the Capitol allow volunteers? And why, since the Capitol [i]does[/i] allow volunteers, doesn't District 12 prepare for that like some of the other districts?[/QUOTE]
Because they find no enthusiasm in participating in the games, and because they're far too poor to afford training and feeding kids from their early years to be prepared for the games.
[QUOTE=Negrul1;35487990]ALSO why didn't the Capitol let [sp]them commit suicide at the end?[/sp] That would have sent a very clear message that they are not to be fucked with, whereas as it was they just looked like idiots.[/QUOTE]
The capitol found themselves in a dilemma here. Everyone loved this couple in love, including the capitol. If they killed one everyone would be angry because they killed the couple, but if they killed both the people in the capitol would be angry because there was no winner. The people in the capitol worship winners and it is also revealed later [sp]that many times the most attractive ones are whored out to the sponsors in request of president Snow[/sp]. So having no winner would defeat the point of the games and people in the capitol would be mad, which would be bad for the government. That's like watching a whole World Cup and no one wins in the end.
[QUOTE=Negrul1;35487990]Also they make such a big deal of getting sponsors being the key to winning, and then the sponsors do approximately jack shit.[/QUOTE]
Without sponsors, neither Katniss nor Peeta would have survived. In the books it is revealed that Haymitch also won thanks to sponsors.
poor gales been trying to tap that since he was 12
[editline]9th April 2012[/editline]
or 15
[QUOTE=Negrul1;35488722]Well they could have actually mentioned that
The parachutes all came with notes signed "-H" so it's reasonable to assume it was just Haymitch
They could have maybe explained that too, and it doesn't change the fact that it was really really dumb
If people were taking your village's children away and murdering them on a yearly basis you would expect people to riot WAY more often than just occasionally. Not to mention the fact that the Capitol was already shitting on their faces to begin with.
OK that helps suppress the poorer districts, but the thing is meant to suppress them all, and it's not doing a very good job of that if it's letting people fight and be killed who already wanted to fight and be killed anyway. It would be far more unfair on all of the districts to just pick people randomly. It is not a punishment to kill people who are willing to risk being killed, whereas it IS a punishment to kill people who are more likely not to be.
You don't need a gladiator school, just a few martial arts lessons and a bit of training. Then they would have a much better chance of actually winning, and not being so poor any more.
The thing I will give the film credit for is ditching some of the particularly stupid aspects of the book. For example, in the book when Katniss and Peeta are on the rooftop Peeta explains that there is a magic forcefield to stop people jumping off and killing themselves. Then a few scenes later they are given free access to bladed weapons.
But this is all nitpicking. My main problem with it, which I should have expanded on more, was that the film completely ignores what makes the Games terrible and the premise interesting - the moral dilemma between killing innocent people or dying yourself. As soon as the Games begins the participants immediately either die or make it clear that they are either good (Katniss; Rue; Peeta) or evil (the gang of thugs). There are practically no shades of grey and there is very little dilemma. This is such an interesting, complicated and delicate concept and in my opinion they completely over-simplified and mishandled it.
Oh and the other main problem was that the film was just plain not that enjoyable. While it started strong (I was digging it until they went into the actual Games) it just devolved into that one episode of Dollhouse where she gets chased by the crazy guy with the bow.
Except Dollhouse did it better.[/QUOTE]
I think you just missed every implication that the film threw at you, it's not that it wasn't explained at all
Didn't read the book, purely judged the movie. It's okay at best.
There was definitely a good set up for several overarching themes that weren't properly capitalized on. For example, when [sp]the hunger games director talk with his superior, and his boss talks about how a little hope, or "spark", can keep the districts in check so long as that spark is maintained,[/sp] it was an excellent foundation for the theme of power and dominance. And for the longest time, [sp]the director is keeping katniss and peeta in check, by giving them an ounce of hope (revising the rules so they could both win due to their love interest), only to take it away in the end.[/sp] What really irked me is that [sp] he suddenly allowed them both to live again when they were about to kill themselves. Two problems I had with this: one, the director showed no signs of growing compassion towards the two. If anything he enjoyed throwing life threatening obstacles at the players. Why would he suddenly feel compelled to let them both live? Which sort of brings me to two: what negative implications would there be on the Capitol had they died? It doesn't fit the theme of maintaining the spark, because everyone was watching and would know that they both voluntarily killed themselves. Even in the hypothetical situation where people would try to revolt from this, the Capitol is well equipped to stop any resistance. If anything, the theme of power would be more consistent had the two died.[/sp]
Other than that (and terrible shaky cam), the movie was alright. 7/10
I think people are forgetting that it was a split second decision to spare both of them.
If your boss says to you "SOMEONE HAS TO WIN THE HUNGER GAMES" and then it looks like there's going to be no winner, you might fuck up and say that both of them should live. I mean he was caught between zero winners and two winners, and President Snow said one winner, so Seneca decided that two winners were better than zero.
I notice for some reason that people discount human error a lot when they watch this movie. They see a character do something dumb and go "That was a dumb part of the movie." rather than seeing it and going "Oh I could see someone doing something like that, even if I wouldn't have."
[QUOTE=Grim Joker;35506512]I think people are forgetting that it was a split second decision to spare both of them.
If your boss says to you "SOMEONE HAS TO WIN THE HUNGER GAMES" and then it looks like there's going to be no winner, you might fuck up and say that both of them should live. I mean he was caught between zero winners and two winners, and President Snow said one winner, so Seneca decided that two winners were better than zero.
I notice for some reason that people discount human error a lot when they watch this movie. They see a character do something dumb and go "That was a dumb part of the movie." rather than seeing it and going "Oh I could see someone doing something like that, even if I wouldn't have."[/QUOTE]
To call it an act of human error seems like a cop out from actually justifying an action. If they both died, it would still uphold the Capitol's reputation of being a ruthless ruler, a reputation that Snow wanted to upkeep. Wouldn't the Capitol suddenly allowing two winners instead of one make them look like they're softening up?
The bottomline is that the games outcome HAS to be dictated by the Capitol(director, President, etc). It cannot be allowed to be controlled by the tributes. The entire point of the games is to remind the districts of their subservience to the Capitol.
Therefore, the director at the end was stuck between a rock and a hard place. [sp]He had dictated, through the rule change, that only one of the final two could win and the other must die. This means one MUST win, and the other die, anything less is a defiance of the Capitol. The two of them killing themselves means they, the tributes, dictated how the games ended. So he changed the rules again, so they wouldn't do it.
Of course this move was transparent to everyone watching. Everyone could see the tributes forced the rules change. This is why he was toast afterwards.[/sp]
[QUOTE=cecilbdemodded;35506592]The bottomline is that the games outcome HAS to be dictated by the Capitol(director, President, etc). It cannot be allowed to be controlled by the tributes. The entire point of the games is to remind the districts of their subservience to the Capitol.
Therefore, the director at the end was stuck between a rock and a hard place. [sp]He had dictated, through the rule change, that only one of the final two could win and the other must die. This means one MUST win, and the other die, anything less is a defiance of the Capitol. The two of them killing themselves means they, the tributes, dictated how the games ended. So he changed the rules again, so they wouldn't do it.
Of course this move was transparent to everyone watching. Everyone could see the tributes forced the rules change. This is why he was toast afterwards.[/sp][/QUOTE]
That actually makes a lot of sense. Thanks for sharing.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
