Jump to content

The Hunger Games


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.

392 replies to this topic

#1

TWoP Dietrich

TWoP Dietrich

    Fanatic

  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle

Posted Mar 21, 2012 @ 11:03 PM

Highly anticipated!

#2

braggtastic

braggtastic

    Stalker

Posted Mar 22, 2012 @ 9:43 AM

No kidding - I bought my tickets earlier in the week for Saturday at the giant theater in NYC (Ziegfeld). It's so fun to see an event movie there opening weekend & revel in the excitement of the crowd.

#3

kyran

kyran

    Channel Surfer

Posted Mar 23, 2012 @ 3:04 AM

Saw the movie yesterday and I loved it!

* Warning, my post may contain some spoilers *

Okay, maybe there were a few things I wasn't really satisfied with but the cast was great. Jeniffer made a very good Katniss and Josh was a good Peeta ( although the image of Peeta I had in my head was completely different.)

Loved:

- Haymitch. Especially in the beginning of the movie there were some fun moments.
- The beginning, the introduction of the Games, all the preparations...
- The Capitol was really nicely made - it was like I thought it would be- full of weird buildings and people.

While the first half of the movie was really good the second half felt a bit rushed. The games seemed to go by pretty fast. Rue was really cute and some of the effects were good too, but I would have liked to see a bit more blood. During the fights the camera was shaking a bit which was hard too watch.

The ending felt pretty open- They really have to make more movies.

One more point- my sister hasn't read the books but she liked the movie too. A few things weren't really clear- she thought Gale was Katniss boyfriend and was like ' poor Gale '.. Guess they should have made it more clear they were just friends.

I really, really hope they make two more movies. Hopefully the movie does well.

Edited by kyran, Mar 23, 2012 @ 3:06 AM.


#4

chandapanda

chandapanda

    Couch Potato

Posted Mar 23, 2012 @ 3:54 AM

I just got home from seeing the movie. I have a few notes, some of them similar to Kyran.

I *loved* Josh Hutcherson as Peeta. I heard a lot of people fussing over how the Peeta/Gale roles should have been reversed, actor-wise, and I agree that, physically, they might should have been. But those few scenes with Liam Hemsworth just showed exactly how glad I was that there were so FEW scenes with him. He looks like he went to the Keanu Reeves school of acting. But, Hutcherson as Peeta was just golden...he looked great with the blonde hair, looked...not really squat, but solid, like he really could lift the big weights and throw them around like he did.

I wish the camera movement hadn't been so herky-jerky. I understand the verisimilitude the cinematographer and director are going for, but my motion sickness was kicking in a bit.

There were parts that were EXTREMELY rushed, in my opinion. The entirety of the actual hunger games, I agree, was very short, and the finale was much quicker than the book. I hope that there are deleted scenes that expand some of these out a bit.

The Rue death scene was heartbreaking as expected. The Peeta/Katniss romance scenes were well-done, but I don't think turquoise is Hutcherson's color. I loved the imagery - there were so many things that looked so close to what I imagined, it was uncanny - the oddness of the Capitol (wardrobe, people, and things), Woody Harrelson as Haymitch was spot on (another part where I wished he would've been on screen more), Wes Bentley as Seneca Crane (although cuter than I imagined Seneca to be), and Foxface was just cast spot-on (as was Thresh and Rue and even the Career tributes). I appreciated that little glimpse of Haymitch working to get sponsors for Katniss, showed that he wasn't how he was at the beginning (drunk and didn't care).

Other than some minor nitpicks, I really enjoyed this movie and will be seeing it again, soon (well, after the crowds start dying down, maybe!).

Side note - If the Twilight trailer came on before the movie like it did for me, all the audience was laughing through the whole thing. I'm not sure that was the intended reaction.

Oh, Kyran, they've already started preproduction on #2. Also, they are going the Twilight and Harry Potter route of taking the last novel into 2 movies, so there will be 3 more (theoretically).

Edited by chandapanda, Mar 23, 2012 @ 3:57 AM.


#5

kyran

kyran

    Channel Surfer

Posted Mar 23, 2012 @ 5:15 AM

So happy to hear that , Chandapanda! I'm not really following news so I guess now I can make my sister happy knowing we will see more of the Hunger Games. Can't wait for film two and three.

The imagery was greatly indeed - I loved it.

Oh, and Cinna was good too. Different look-wise then expected but nice.

If they had made the film an half hour longer it would have been perfect ( more fighting and games !) , but i guess many people would find it too long.. Still, a very enjoyable movie.

If they release the extended dvd version I will purchase it , hopefully it will make some things a bit more clear.

#6

Munchiewoman

Munchiewoman

    Fanatic

Posted Mar 23, 2012 @ 7:21 AM

wish the camera movement hadn't been so herky-jerky. I understand the verisimilitude the cinematographer and director are going for, but my motion sickness was kicking in a bit.


I liked it for the start of the hunger games where it was all just chaos, but I don't think it should have been used for all the fight scenes.

I understand why they left some things out, but I thought the ending was too rushed, especially Katniss not telling Peeta the truth as she did in the books. My daughter was very disappointed with that aspect of it too.

I thought Woody Harrelson was perfect. Rue was perfect and I was sniffling all through her death scene. I couldn't see the audience from where I was sitting but my daughter and her friend both did the salute and I was wondering if a lot of other people were as well.

I hope there is an extended version as well.

Side note - If the Twilight trailer came on before the movie like it did for me, all the audience was laughing through the whole thing. I'm not sure that was the intended reaction.


We got laughter AND boos. Heh.

#7

Skittl1321

Skittl1321

    Fanatic

Posted Mar 23, 2012 @ 8:53 AM

Also, they are going the Twilight and Harry Potter route of taking the last novel into 2 movies, so there will be 3 more (theoretically).


Silly. If they were to lengthen any of them, it should have been the first one (which wouldn't have been a good strategy though, so I see why they didn't) The last book of HP was insanely amazing, and LONG- fans clamored for every second of it. The last book of Hunger Games is pretty well universally called "okay" or even disappointing. Why drag it out? (I know nothing about Twilight, so I can't compare there).

#8

powerinherpen

powerinherpen

    Channel Surfer

Posted Mar 23, 2012 @ 10:03 AM

I was really disappointed by the movie. I went at midnight. I initially thought that only Gale was miscast, but after watching, I'm not a fan of Peeta either. He came across a little slow and weak to me, which I never thought in the books. The only scene I thought he sold was the night before the Games, on the roof with Katniss. I was disappointed by all the added scenes that weren't in the book - the movie was too long and those scenes (to me) didn't really add anything. I understand that some things just won't translate to the big screen so they had to explain it more, but other scenes (like most of the ones with Snow) just didn't add to the movie.

I definitely think they softened Katniss up. One of my favorite things about the books is Katniss not being your regular/average hero - she's got an edge not necessarily from being a mean person, but just not a soft, gentle girl who likes to hunt either. I felt like they lost alot of who she is in the books and softened her up for either the studio or the audiences or both. She came across cheesy in several scenes (mostly her scenes with Peeta). They say they didn't want to make another Twilight, but they definitely didn't try to distinguish themselves that hard from it.

I didn't understand tiny changes they made from the books either, like Rue's death, Haymitch being nothing more than a highly functional drunk, etc. Oh well. What can I expect from a PG-13 movie? I thought the girl playing Rue was great, Prim was great and Jennifer Lawrence did well with her material to be Katniss.

#9

Munchiewoman

Munchiewoman

    Fanatic

Posted Mar 23, 2012 @ 12:54 PM

They say they didn't want to make another Twilight, but they definitely didn't try to distinguish themselves that hard from it.


I can see your point about Katniss being softer, but otherwise? HUGE distinction. Even softer, Katniss is nowhere near the morose, useless lump that Bella is, and Katniss has plenty of reason to be morose. And neither of the main boys looks constipated. or, you know, ever sparkles. I cannot see any similarities between the two.

#10

LiberryLady

LiberryLady

    Stalker

  • Gender:Female
  • Location:SoCal

Posted Mar 23, 2012 @ 12:59 PM

wish the camera movement hadn't been so herky-jerky. I understand the verisimilitude the cinematographer and director are going for, but my motion sickness was kicking in a bit.

I was thinking whoa, whoa, whoa... calm down, camera guy!! at first. They didn't need a shaky cam in the "setting the scene" bits District 12, for example. But it worked for the battles, since it felt like Katniss' point of view, and it kept the killing scenes from being too graphic.

I felt it was well-paced, well-acted, and had a great look. I haven't re-read the books, so I didn't have that That's not in the book! experience. (Except for the bread from Rue's district. They left that out, and it was my favorite/weepiest part of the first book.)

What bugged was the midnight showing audience I saw this with. They were the quietest I have ever heard that large of an audience be for the first half of the movie, but once the Petta/cave part started up? Oy. The squealing commenced. Also, they were cheering the deaths of the later Tributes. Way to miss the point of the movie, guys!

Side note - If the Twilight trailer came on before the movie like it did for me, all the audience was laughing through the whole thing. I'm not sure that was the intended reaction.

Hee. Yeah, a lot of laughing in my theater, too. When the deer appeared and Bella suddenly appeared all red-eyed, I hollered, "Watch out, Bambi!!"

Edited by LiberryLady, Mar 23, 2012 @ 1:00 PM.


#11

chandapanda

chandapanda

    Couch Potato

Posted Mar 23, 2012 @ 1:07 PM

I had a different audience than you did, LiberryLady. During the movie, the audience I was in was very respectful at the deaths (usually gasping and/or a chorus of "oh no"). They did cheer a couple of times, but that was with Katniss's score and when Katniss/Peeta were stopped from eating the toxic berries.

I felt a bit that Peeta wasn't shown as strong as his characterization in the book - something key missing from the movie is how smart he is, how charming (which was only shown a glimpse at the pre-Games interview with Flickerman). I really wished they would've shown the highlights reel, showing how Peeta got in with the careers and then survived and didn't sell Katniss out. The glimpses that were shown in the movie of his cunning/strength were highlights for me - the painting his head as a rock, the pointing at Cato's hand for Katniss to shoot, and his brute strength throwing Cato over were all well done.

Yes, yes, if there were a Team Peeta, I would definitely be on it. I was on it for the books and moreso now from the movie. Gale's characterization just seemed always grouchy and selfish towards Katniss (not towards his family, obviously). Peeta always put Katniss ahead of him.

#12

powerinherpen

powerinherpen

    Channel Surfer

Posted Mar 23, 2012 @ 1:20 PM

I can see your point about Katniss being softer, but otherwise? HUGE distinction. Even softer, Katniss is nowhere near the morose, useless lump that Bella is, and Katniss has plenty of reason to be morose. And neither of the main boys looks constipated. or, you know, ever sparkles. I cannot see any similarities between the two.


I see the similarities in how they played out Gale and Peeta. As someone stated before, if you hadn't read the book, you'd think Gale was her boyfriend, not her best friend. The longing shots of him watching her kiss Peeta and the fact that I don't think they really delved into her reasoning for kissing Peeta, cuddling with him, etc, made it seem like Twilight to me. I guess they were trying to set up a love triangle for the subsequent movies, but I feel like they added emotion that wasn't necessarily there in the first book.


I kind of feel bad for the girl that played Clove - if she keeps playing these evil roles, she's gonna get typecast!

#13

spanky91088

spanky91088

    Fanatic

Posted Mar 23, 2012 @ 1:44 PM

My only problem with the movie was that I felt the importance of Rue/the Rue Katniss friendship and it's importance in relation to the riots and uprisings in the districts wasn't as big as I felt it was in the book. Rue's death and Katniss's reaction to her death was what started the uprising. The uprising that drives the next 2 books. I'd have liked to see Katniss getting the bread from District 11, as well a bit more breathing room after Rue's death. It jumped quite quickly to Katniss finding Peeta painted in the riverbed and half the theater was laughing while the other half was still recovering from hysterical sobbing.

Also a little bummed that the wolf mutts weren't shown having the Tribute's eyes. At least not clearly. That was a super creepy, fucked up moment for Katniss in the book. Like a moment when it REALLY hit her exactly how demented the Capitol is.

Agree with everyone who mentioned the super shaky camera work at the Cornucopia. I get the aesthetics and reasoning behind it, but that's really the audience's only chance too see these Tributes that we've pictured in our heads for years in some cases. It would have been nice to show all of the tributes clearly at SOME point in the movie.

#14

Lyndisty

Lyndisty

    Loyal Viewer

Posted Mar 23, 2012 @ 4:52 PM

What bugged was the midnight showing audience I saw this with. They were the quietest I have ever heard that large of an audience be for the first half of the movie, but once the Petta/cave part started up? Oy. The squealing commenced. Also, they were cheering the deaths of the later Tributes. Way to miss the point of the movie, guys!


I was fortunate enough to see this last night with a very involved and reactive audience: laughing at all the funny bits, whimpering when they knew something awful was about to happen, "awwww"-ing during the cute/romantic parts, doing the combo "awwwwww"/whimper every time Rue was on screen. It was a lot of fun. My audience was apparently Team Peeta all the way, because every time they cut back to Gale in D12, they cracked up. The only time they cheered an actual death was when Thresh got Clove, but I expect that that's because they also knew what was coming next.

We also had the Twilight preview, and it was met mostly with snickers and snorts except for a small group in the back who were ...pretty vocal Twilight fans.

I told my friends that I give it a 4.5/5, and I stand by that. There were things that didn't make it in that I would have liked (mostly funny lines...mostly Peeta's funny lines, actually). I actually enjoyed the cutaways to the Snow/Crane conversations and to the Control Room. It gave me a little more depth, which I felt was lacking in the books, given the first-person perspective. The casting was pretty much spot-on, although I agree with others that Liam Hemsworth was maybe a little...wooden?

The non-book addition that made me happiest, though? The little speech they gave Cato as he was holding Peeta hostage right at the end. It gave him some depth, made him a little human, rather than just a killing machine. In the book, nearly every other character of consequence got something to round them out a little. I kind of felt that was missing for Cato, and I'm glad they put it in.

#15

clevernamehere

clevernamehere

    Couch Potato

Posted Mar 23, 2012 @ 5:25 PM

There was only one thing I really missed from the books, the bread from District 11. That was one of the most heartbreaking moments of the books to me, that people who had so little sacrificed so much to give Katniss a little bit of gratitude. But just showing the riot moved the plot along better.

I didn't mind the tribute's eyes being missing from the dogs, we didn't get a close enough look at most of the tributes for that to connect.

Foxface didn't look the way she is described in the books to me, the actress's face isn't really pointed, but it is a small enough role that it didn't bother me. Peeta wasn't as I imagined him, but the actor did a pretty good job.

The longing shots of him watching her kiss Peeta and the fact that I don't think they really delved into her reasoning for kissing Peeta, cuddling with him, etc, made it seem like Twilight to me.


I thought they did a reasonably good job of showing Katniss's thought process. Gale tells Katniss it upset him to watch her kiss Peeta later on, so they might as well show it now, although it would have been good to make Gale/Katniss a little clearer.

#16

ethanvahlere

ethanvahlere

    Stalker

  • Location:Brooklyn, NY
  • Interests:Movies, books, music, apple juice (which I drink the way the Gilmores drink coffee), Veronica Mars, The Wire, Big Love, Pushing Daisies.

Posted Mar 23, 2012 @ 5:33 PM

Put me in the "liked it, didn't love it" camp. I do agree they softened Katniss up a little, but they also made her savvier as far as how to play to the crowd, I thought. And I thought the satire on the spectacle, though a little rushed, worked pretty well (Stanley Tucci was properly unctuous). The problem came with the actual games; I understand they didn't want to get too graphic, but they felt very rushed and perfunctory, and the dogs didn't look convincing at all. Overall, I think it was solid, if not spectacular, and though Lawrence didn't have as much to work with as she did in Winter's Bone, she did very well, I thought.

#17

Haberdasher

Haberdasher

    Loyal Viewer

Posted Mar 23, 2012 @ 7:53 PM

Side note - If the Twilight trailer came on before the movie like it did for me, all the audience was laughing through the whole thing. I'm not sure that was the intended reaction.

That trailer played at my theater too. As soon as the trailer ended, everyone started snickering.

When I was reading the books, I found Katniss to be rather annoying (it’s always bad when I love the secondary characters and dislike the main characters), so I think the movie benefited from not being in her head constantly. Put me in the “liked it, far from loving it” group (both the books and movie).

#18

sskrill

sskrill

    Loyal Viewer

Posted Mar 23, 2012 @ 8:36 PM

I liked it a lot as well, but felt like something was missing.

I liked the casting for Peeta, Rue, Cinna, and Effie. I thought those were spot on.

Woody Harrelson was ok but I didn't picture Haymitch as a blonde. I also didn't think they gave his character his due. They never really made the connection that Haymitch won because he outsmarted the others in his Game. You got it through some of the conversation but it wasn't the same.

Agreed that Gale's casting was mearly, eh. I pictured someone a bit broader.

And Lawrence was ok as Katniss but I think they could have done better. I expected a younger version of Angelina Jolie and think that would have been truer to the character.

Its surprising that it was so long and yet it seemed so rushed. Lots of stuff altered/deleted: Peeta's father coming to see Katniss, the schoolmate who gave her the pin, the bread from Rue's district, no explanation of the leaves/tracker jacker venom, the Avox, not seeing the hovercraft pick up the bodies, never showed the rooftop, etc.
And yet it ran long?

#19

MilaNese

MilaNese

    Couch Potato

Posted Mar 23, 2012 @ 8:46 PM

We got laughter AND boos [at the Twilight teaser]. Heh.


UK here and we got laughter and groaning.
The audience here was mostly quiet, a few very vocal sobbers (unfortunately one right next to me, it was so bad I had to give her a tissue because she kept sniffling) but otherwise respectful and quiet. I kind of like the more vocal audiences, and so far at every Twilight I have been, everybody was a lot of fun (I go to late screenings since I try to avoid the twihards) with the audience being the highlight of the show.

I was expecting not to like the movie a lot, but I actually really did. The herky jerky was a bit jarring, but it worked really well to portray Katniss' point of view I thought. And I was not a huge fan of Lawrence as Katniss, just because I do not think she ever looks 16 at all... but she is really amazing. She conveys a ton with her facial expressions and she carries the movie, so I have decided that for me that is more important than her being the skinny 16 year old from the book (and more of a Lara Crofty persona). Josh Hutcherson I found great too, and he looks a lot younger than her, so I could see a 16 year old in him. He isn't as good as she is, but I thought he brought Peeta's honestly and sweetness well. I had a few other things I disliked about casting prior to seeing the movie (Woody Harrelson, Wes Bentley...) but having seen the film I thought everyone did a great job. The girl cast as Rue is so darn precious! I want one!

I really like the "Truman Show" aspect they gave it and the way they solved the flashbacks by integrating it into a hallucination and making it rather fluid. Also loved how Stanley Tucci's character (drawing a blank for a name) would expose without it sounding like they were exposing. All very nicely done. I enjoyed the entire movie so much thanks to these small and smart changes that mean that, if my mother for example, decided to go (she does not read YA novels) she would understand it (almost) all.

A few things I thought were poor were the capitol buildings (honestly? Stock footage of skyscrapers? They could have gone all out there yet it was... underwhelming) and the special effects and make up. The firy dresses were silly, with the fire looking like an afterthought (and that goes for all scenes with fire in them, they were just unable to create a good fake fire, I think), and the "wounds" were laughably bad. Particularly the gash across Katniss' forehead that Peeta smudges with the ointment... I mean really, they just smeared some tomato sauce across her forehead without even bothering. Every bad zombie move has better make up than that.

I just found out I am going to see it again tomorrow (my aunt bought me tickets to take my young cousins, who have not yet read the books, so it will be interesting to see how they like it), which is a bit soon to rewatch, but at least will give me a chance to check out more details.

#20

lleykian54

lleykian54

    Couch Potato

Posted Mar 23, 2012 @ 8:46 PM

the schoolmate who gave her the pin,


Suzanne Collins stated very early on during production of the movie that Madge's character (the one who gave Katniss the pin) would not be appearing in the movies and frankly, that's one change I was fine with. I always felt like Madge was a character Suzanne had a plan for but got derailed in the later books and it never came to fruition. Her character just never turned out to be as significant as you would have expected and I don't think she was even in Mockingjay and I don't think it said if it was because she died or not.

#21

Colonel Green

Colonel Green

    Stalker

Posted Mar 23, 2012 @ 8:49 PM

I'd call it a good adaptation that dances on the edge of being great.

In terms of whether or not they softened Katniss, I think the lack of her first-person perspective necessitates having her emote more a bit.

I liked the new stuff, and I can see why they did it. It foreshadows the events of the latter movies more, and gives more of the Capitol's POV. The discussion of why they have a winner, in particular, I thought was a good scene.

Jennifer Lawrence was great, as expected. Actually, as the opening shots appeared it occurred to me just how similar Katniss' basic setup is to Ree in Winter's Bone (teenaged white trash girl who hunts and is responsible for caring for younger sibling(s) becauser her father is dead and her mother is non-functional. She's really an amazing actress.

I think Rue really needed another scene or two, but the actress playing her was very affecting and natural.

Also, and this something that's true of both the book and the movie, since we're told that this is a show constantly, I do wonder about the "career tributes". They're basically the villains of an 80s teen movie; in wrestling terms, they're the "heels" of the proceedings, and yet we're told they almost always win. That doesn't really seem that audience-friendly.

Edit: Actually, there's one bit at the end that I think didn't feel quite right, because of changes made earlier. In the book, solely from Katniss' POV, the decisions of the Gamemakers are invisible and inscrutable, with her only guessing at what they're doing at any given time. But in the movie we follow Seneca Crane through the entire process, only to not show him when he arrives at the culmination of his story and his inevitable/fatal error. Having spent so much time with him leading up to this moment, I think they really needed to show him making that decision.

Edited by Colonel Green, Mar 23, 2012 @ 9:23 PM.


#22

Holliday

Holliday

    Stalker

  • Gender:Female

Posted Mar 23, 2012 @ 9:23 PM

I loved the movie and now must read all the books. Backwards, I know, but oh well. As someone who reallly doesn't like gore of any kind, I appreciated the pace of the movie: the extended build up of and the fairly quick games. But I can understand how the pace would disappoint others.

I will say that the District 11 uprising confused me and now I know why. I do wish they would have included the bread scene that some have referred to. Some context would have been nice.

#23

Haberdasher

Haberdasher

    Loyal Viewer

Posted Mar 23, 2012 @ 10:03 PM

I would have liked to have seen Katniss get the bread from District 11 too. The bond between her and Rue that existed in the book didn't come across strong enough for me in the movie. I was gutted when Rue died in the book. I felt nothing when she died in the movie.

Edited by Haberdasher, Mar 23, 2012 @ 10:04 PM.


#24

JenL

JenL

    Loyal Viewer

Posted Mar 23, 2012 @ 10:20 PM

and I don't think she was even in Mockingjay and I don't think it said if it was because she died or not.

Can it be a spoiler if it's in a later book, even though it's about a character who was cut out of the movie series? Just in case....
Spoiler


Also, and this something that's true of both the book and the movie, since we're told that this is a show constantly, I do wonder about the "career tributes". They're basically the villains of an 80s teen movie; in wrestling terms, they're the "heels" of the proceedings, and yet we're told they almost always win. That doesn't really seem that audience-friendly.


I think part of it is about perception. To Katniss, and to the high-number Districts, the Careers are, as you say, the "heels". But to the Districts those careers come from, maybe not so much. After all, those Districts are invested enough in the games to have academies that train potential Careers. The Careers probably don't seem like such arrogant bullies to the people that trained them, and then benefit from the victory in the years when one of their tributes wins. And as for the Capital, they've told themselves so many lies about what they're doing and why, Effie thinks that manners are more important than gaining a possible survival advantage....

#25

Colonel Green

Colonel Green

    Stalker

Posted Mar 23, 2012 @ 10:23 PM

I get why they'd be popular in their own districts, obviously, but even the warped world of the Capitol (people who obviously enjoy these games, so they start off rather distinct) it doesn't seem like they'd be that popular. They run around like a band of thugs teaming up on everybody else, and the fact that they usually win makes them the overdog, something a majority of people instinctively side against.

#26

Haberdasher

Haberdasher

    Loyal Viewer

Posted Mar 23, 2012 @ 10:35 PM

Woody Harrelson was ok but I didn't picture Haymitch as a blonde. I also didn't think they gave his character his due. They never really made the connection that Haymitch won because he outsmarted the others in his Game. You got it through some of the conversation but it wasn't the same.

It's been two years since I read the first book, so I may be misremembering, but I don't remember Haymitch outsmarting the other tributes being mentioned in the first book. It isn't until the second book that we get to see just how he won.

What I got about his character from the first book is that Haymitch is very competent when sober (and when he feels he's working with tributes who have a chance of winning). I don't feel that came across very well in the movie, probably because many of the subtle messages he sends to Katniss while she's in the arena weren't shown. In any case, he's my favorite character, so I hope the next movie does him justice.

#27

lleykian54

lleykian54

    Couch Potato

Posted Mar 23, 2012 @ 11:40 PM

I get why they'd be popular in their own districts, obviously, but even the warped world of the Capitol (people who obviously enjoy these games, so they start off rather distinct) it doesn't seem like they'd be that popular. They run around like a band of thugs teaming up on everybody else, and the fact that they usually win makes them the overdog, something a majority of people instinctively side against.



See maybe it's just me but honestly, I never got the sense that the people in the Capitol cared a lick who won or what District they were from or whether the winners kept coming from the same District. I got the feeling that these people were just there for the blood thirsty nature of the games. They were just interested in the drama of watching these kids kill each other. It didn't matter which District won, as long as they got a good show of watching kids kill each other.

It's been two years since I read the first book, so I may be misremembering, but I don't remember Haymitch outsmarting the other tributes being mentioned in the first book. It isn't until the second book that we get to see just how he won.


You're right. In fact Katniss spends much of the first book wondering how Haymitch could have possibly won because she's only known him as this drunk, sloppy, barely functioning guy.

#28

gale6482

gale6482

    Channel Surfer

Posted Mar 24, 2012 @ 12:46 AM

Just got back and I have to say it was pretty much everything I was hoping for. I really only have 2 nitpicks, the biggest being that one of my favorite scenes in the book is when Katniss hears the rule change in the games, where 2 tributes will be allowed to live if they are from the same district.....her reaction in the books is so much bigger than the movie. And it shows the reader that she really cares about Peeta. I was sitting there anticipating it and it just never happens....her little whisper just did not convey the same emotion. Also I feel like Haymitch was much drunker in the books.....I certainly didn't get belligerent and resentful raging alcoholic from that one scene they showed on the train. I know he shapes up later in the books but he was much more incompetent in the beginning.

I was very pleasantly surprised by Josh Hutcherson (that's his name right?). When the cast was announced I was cursing whoever made the decision to cast him as Peeta.....he is just not the Peeta in my head. But he totally convinced me, I completely bought the relationship with Katniss and was pretty moved by it. The cave scenes were just about as sweet and moving as they were when I was reading them.

I pray that the next movies are made quickly.....I cannot wait to see some of my favorite characters from the second book brought to life!

#29

sskrill

sskrill

    Loyal Viewer

Posted Mar 24, 2012 @ 2:40 AM

(Sorry haven't quoted in a while and can't seem to figure out how to do it)

Quote:

Suzanne Collins stated very early on during production of the movie that Madge's character (the one who gave Katniss the pin) would not be appearing in the movies and frankly, that's one change I was fine with. <endQ>


It wasn't so much the character that I cared about, but something seemed off. I think it was that we had already met mom, Prim, and Gale and they were the only ones who came to see her at the justice building. I felt like Peeta's father showing her kindness, even though he knew she could very well be the one to kill his son, gave a different sense of District 12. And having shown both Madge and Peeta's father would have shown that Katniss was somewhat respected by thier town. I guess it just felt like they isolated her, like no one in the district would have cared what happened to her.

In regards to Haymitch: I read books 1 and 2 back to back so I may have confused the part about her realizing he outsmarted them.

#30

clevernamehere

clevernamehere

    Couch Potato

Posted Mar 24, 2012 @ 9:36 AM

I get why [the careers would] be popular in their own districts, obviously, but even the warped world of the Capitol (people who obviously enjoy these games, so they start off rather distinct) it doesn't seem like they'd be that popular. They run around like a band of thugs teaming up on everybody else, and the fact that they usually win makes them the overdog, something a majority of people instinctively side against.

They're the Yankees, they have more money and better players than teams from other parts of the country and they win a lot. That makes some people root for them and some people root against them.

See maybe it's just me but honestly, I never got the sense that the people in the Capitol cared a lick who won or what District they were from or whether the winners kept coming from the same District. I got the feeling that these people were just there for the blood thirsty nature of the games.

I don't think most Capitol residents are all that blood thirsty, Effie and a lot of the other residents don't even seem to understand how much the tributes want to live. The people in the Capitol have a very disengaged view of the games (and pretty much everything else in the world).

It isn't really all that explored in the books, but 74 years puts the beginning of the Hunger Games in living memory. It is only slightly further away than World War II is from us now. So there would people in the Capitol who feel very deeply about the justice of the Hunger Games.

I expected a younger version of Angelina Jolie and think that would have been truer to the character.

Katniss isn't described as unusually beautiful and considering their lack of food, I didn't expect her to be ripped. The biggest issue between Katniss in the books and Katniss on screen is skin tone. If Jessica Alba was ten years younger, she would have been closer looks wise (with her natural hair color).

One thing that was moving in the books but that I understand why they left out was Effie commenting on how Katniss and Peeta had better manners than past tributes, but really they simply were better fed and not as desperate when they saw the bounty on the train.

Edited by clevernamehere, Mar 24, 2012 @ 9:38 AM.