The Hunger Games! (Movie and Books)

This topic is locked from further discussion.

#1 Posted by SpeccsOps (51 posts) -
The Hunger Games.. A massive movie phenomenon. I would personally call it one of the best films of 2012, and certainly the most gripping book trilogy.. Thoughts/Opinions?
#2 Posted by redstorm72 (4607 posts) -

I enjoyed the books quite a bit, though I was dissapointed by the ending of Mocking Jay. The movie exceeded my expectations (which admittedly, were pretty low) and I thought it was very good, particularly Jennifer Lawrence. I'm looking forward to the next film.

#3 Posted by MonsieurX (31216 posts) -
Best film of 2012? :lol:
#4 Posted by SpeccsOps (51 posts) -

I enjoyed the books quite a bit, though I was dissapointed by the ending of Mocking Jay. The movie exceeded my expectations (which admittedly, were pretty low) and I thought it was very good, particularly Jennifer Lawrence. I'm looking forward to the next film.

redstorm72
The ending of the movie was such an irritating cliff hanger. I am definitely going to see the next one in the cinemas.
#5 Posted by SpeccsOps (51 posts) -
Best film of 2012? :lol:MonsieurX
Yes, everyone has their own opinions, and I personally believe that it was ONE of the best.
#6 Posted by Cloud_Insurance (3279 posts) -

the movie was terrible

have not read the books

#7 Posted by raven_squad (78438 posts) -
I was very underwhelmed by the film. Definitely don't see what all the fuss is about.
#8 Posted by jim_shorts (7320 posts) -

The books were okay for what they are. I haven't seen the film. As far as dystopian literature goes it's pretty far down my list.

#9 Posted by biggest_loser (24105 posts) -
The concept is sickening. The killing kids part, not the reality TV stuff.
#10 Posted by SpeccsOps (51 posts) -
The concept is sickening. The killing kids part, not the reality TV stuff. biggest_loser
But that's the whole point of it? It is a sickening concept and so it's entertaining. I'm not saying its right.
#11 Posted by MonsieurX (31216 posts) -
[QUOTE="MonsieurX"]Best film of 2012? :lol:SpeccsOps
Yes, everyone has their own opinions, and I personally believe that it was ONE of the best.

This is Battle Royale for kids
#12 Posted by SpeccsOps (51 posts) -
[QUOTE="SpeccsOps"][QUOTE="MonsieurX"]Best film of 2012? :lol:MonsieurX
Yes, everyone has their own opinions, and I personally believe that it was ONE of the best.

This is Battle Royale for kids

And was Battle Royale not a great film? It was.
#13 Posted by Allicrombie (25359 posts) -
Welcome to OT!
#14 Posted by PannicAtack (21040 posts) -
[QUOTE="SpeccsOps"][QUOTE="MonsieurX"]Best film of 2012? :lol:MonsieurX
Yes, everyone has their own opinions, and I personally believe that it was ONE of the best.

This is Battle Royale for kids

Don't the two have completely different characters, themes, and worldbuilding?
#15 Posted by FMAB_GTO (14385 posts) -
Did not read the books but I'm planning on watching the film if I have time! =]
Welcome to OT! Allicrombie
loool
#16 Posted by biggest_loser (24105 posts) -
[QUOTE="biggest_loser"]The concept is sickening. The killing kids part, not the reality TV stuff. SpeccsOps
But that's the whole point of it? It is a sickening concept and so it's entertaining. I'm not saying its right.

But in the movie though you're meant to be glad when the leader of the bad group dies. Doesn't that kind of undermine the film's comment on violence as entertainment?
#17 Posted by lamprey263 (24722 posts) -
for entertainment value it's okay movie as long as I don't think too hard, but so easy to mock at the same time
#18 Posted by PannicAtack (21040 posts) -
[QUOTE="SpeccsOps"][QUOTE="biggest_loser"]The concept is sickening. The killing kids part, not the reality TV stuff. biggest_loser
But that's the whole point of it? It is a sickening concept and so it's entertaining. I'm not saying its right.

But in the movie though you're meant to be glad when the leader of the bad group dies. Doesn't that kind of undermine the film's comment on violence as entertainment?

That's a good point. Though the movie made him more sympathetic what with that speech he delivers. In the book he was a lot more flat, so I think the movie improved on that. Personally, I never really felt glad when any of the "bad guys" died.
#19 Posted by ujjval16 (1669 posts) -
I've only seen the movie, and I though it was alright. I thought there were some pretty stupid moments though. Like when the main chick was in the tree, and everyone else was trying to get her, one of the guys was like we'll just wait her out, someone get a fire going, but if they had a fire, why not just burn the tree down?
#20 Posted by SpeccsOps (51 posts) -
[QUOTE="SpeccsOps"][QUOTE="biggest_loser"]The concept is sickening. The killing kids part, not the reality TV stuff. biggest_loser
But that's the whole point of it? It is a sickening concept and so it's entertaining. I'm not saying its right.

But in the movie though you're meant to be glad when the leader of the bad group dies. Doesn't that kind of undermine the film's comment on violence as entertainment?

I don't quite understand what you mean by the films comment on it? Please elaborate.
#21 Posted by SpeccsOps (51 posts) -
I've only seen the movie, and I though it was alright. I thought there were some pretty stupid moments though. Like when the main chick was in the tree, and everyone else was trying to get her, one of the guys was like we'll just wait her out, someone get a fire going, but if they had a fire, why not just burn the tree down?ujjval16
It's kinda hard to set a whole tree on fire with a couple of matches..?
#22 Posted by PannicAtack (21040 posts) -
[QUOTE="SpeccsOps"][QUOTE="biggest_loser"][QUOTE="SpeccsOps"] But that's the whole point of it? It is a sickening concept and so it's entertaining. I'm not saying its right.

But in the movie though you're meant to be glad when the leader of the bad group dies. Doesn't that kind of undermine the film's comment on violence as entertainment?

I don't quite understand what you mean by the films comment on it? Please elaborate.

Basically, the idea is that it's hypocritical for a film or a story to try to have an anti-violence stance when it itself revels in the violence. For example, Avatar makes a dig at Bush's War on Terror, despite the fact that the central conflict is resolved in a big climactic battle.
#23 Posted by SpeccsOps (51 posts) -
[QUOTE="PannicAtack"][QUOTE="SpeccsOps"][QUOTE="biggest_loser"] But in the movie though you're meant to be glad when the leader of the bad group dies. Doesn't that kind of undermine the film's comment on violence as entertainment?

I don't quite understand what you mean by the films comment on it? Please elaborate.

Basically, the idea is that it's hypocritical for a film or a story to try to have an anti-violence stance when it itself revels in the violence. For example, Avatar makes a dig at Bush's War on Terror, despite the fact that the central conflict is resolved in a big climactic battle.

But it doesn't have an anti-violence stance? In the opening words it says that 24 contestants must fight to the death?
#24 Posted by PannicAtack (21040 posts) -

[QUOTE="PannicAtack"][QUOTE="SpeccsOps"] I don't quite understand what you mean by the films comment on it? Please elaborate.SpeccsOps
Basically, the idea is that it's hypocritical for a film or a story to try to have an anti-violence stance when it itself revels in the violence. For example, Avatar makes a dig at Bush's War on Terror, despite the fact that the central conflict is resolved in a big climactic battle.

But it doesn't have an anti-violence stance? In the opening words it says that 24 contestants must fight to the death?

I'm talking about themes. I'd say Platoon is an anti-war movie despite having a war in it.

#25 Posted by SpeccsOps (51 posts) -

[QUOTE="SpeccsOps"][QUOTE="PannicAtack"] Basically, the idea is that it's hypocritical for a film or a story to try to have an anti-violence stance when it itself revels in the violence. For example, Avatar makes a dig at Bush's War on Terror, despite the fact that the central conflict is resolved in a big climactic battle.PannicAtack

But it doesn't have an anti-violence stance? In the opening words it says that 24 contestants must fight to the death?

I'm talking about themes. I'd say Platoon is an anti-war movie despite having a war in it.

I haven't seen that movie, so I can't relate, but I kind of see where you're coming from now, but I don't see how that affects the film itself. Looking purely at 'The Hunger Games' books and film, I'd say they are very successful and make great entertainment.
#26 Posted by Person0 (2944 posts) -
Never read any of the books, hated the movie. it was extremely boring.
#27 Posted by ShadowsDemon (10172 posts) -
It was alright. Nothing amazing, though. The books are the same.
#28 Posted by Shadow4020 (1990 posts) -

First book was great, but the second and third were lacking. I thought the movie could have been better, there was little character development and the camera shook too much.

#29 Posted by Yusuke420 (2793 posts) -

Jennifer Lawrence is super hot, that being said I enjoyed the movie and I thought they did a good job adapting the book. Hopefully Catching Fire will continue to live up to the book trilogies reputation.

#30 Posted by SpeccsOps (51 posts) -

Jennifer Lawrence is super hot, that being said I enjoyed the movie and I thought they did a good job adapting the book. Hopefully Catching Fire will continue to live up to the book trilogies reputation.

Yusuke420
Amen.
#31 Posted by Smokescreened84 (2514 posts) -
I loved the books, I was gripped through the whole series. The movie was okay, it was nicely done in areas but it felt like it was going by too fast without taking any time for any meaningful character development.