The Hunger Games (Dir. Gary Ross) |OT| May The Odds Be Ever In Your Favor

Status
Not open for further replies.
demosthenes said:
3/4 through book 2, it is awesome. Can't wait for this movie already, hope they lose the shaky cam.
Click to expand...

Holy shit is that annoying. I don't understand why anyone thinks shaky cam is a good idea for action scenes...

So me and GF went to see it yesterday, with neither of us having read the books.

Thought it was good. I think they took a bit long in the beginning, but other than that an enjoyable film.
 
JGS said:
She is always thrown off by Peeta's actions. From the time he tossed her bread, she doesn't quite get him and he comes off as passive aggressive throughout the book.
She stays out of the loop as to the reasons why
.

The bread scene is kind of important in the book and I think that the movie both highlighted a lot while not giving it a lot of credit toward Katniss' view of him.
In the book, they are younger in that bread scene so she doesn't remember it as vividly and doesn't quite get the kindness displayed and the action is less clear.

Of course, she also doesn't get that Peeta really loves her nor does she understand anything about her own feelings since it was never her intention to fall for anyone.
Click to expand...

Alrighty, thank you.
 
For what it's worth, I thought the shakey cinematography worked well for the movie in everything BUT the action scenes. Gave the entire movie a gritty documentary feel. Some of the action was so indecipherable though that it felt like they were just trying to disguise a low budget. It's a technique an amateur would use. Hopefully the filmmakers drop that in the sequels without compromising the slight handheld quality that the rest of the film had.
 
the anime man said:
Okay, I'm confused by the history between Katniss and Peeta.
I read up on it online and it said that she felt awkward about her owing a lot to Peeta but in the movie she seems really mad at him initially. Did I miss something or what?

Please note that I haven't read the books.
Click to expand...

In the book her father had just died and Katniss and her family was starving. She'd had a bad day and was digging through the vendors garbage cans when Peeta's Mom caught her and scolded her. So Katniss went to a tree and collapsed there, basically accepting her and her families fate of starving to death. That's when Peeta comes out with burned loaves and throws one to her. Near the bread she sees some kind of flower, it and the bread give her new hope and that's when she decides to start hunting. So she credits Peeta for saving her and families lives. She saw it as an act of kindness and later realizes he burned the bread and took a beating for it on purpose for her because he loved her. She does kind of resent the fact that she has to kill someone she owes so much to, so that's where the anger comes from.
 
Secret_Riddle said:
For what it's worth, I thought the shakey cinematography worked well for the movie in everything BUT the action scenes. Gave the entire movie a gritty documentary feel. Some of the action was so indecipherable though that it felt like they were just trying to disguise a low budget. It's a technique an amateur would use. Hopefully the filmmakers drop that in the sequels without compromising the slight handheld quality that the rest of the film had.
Click to expand...
It didn't bother me until the end where it was jarringand served no purpose. Doing it when the games started was great.
 
Secret_Riddle said:
Some of the action was so indecipherable though that it felt like they were just trying to disguise a low budget. It's a technique an amateur would use.
Click to expand...

image.php
 
border said:
image.php
Click to expand...

Chris Nolan doesn't use shakey cam. He just films very close up to the action and cuts very quickly. He also hasn't used that technique since Batman Begins. Action in Dark Knight is better, and Inception's hallway scene, plus TDKR prologue's choreography is by far and away better than any single section of action in The Hunger Games.

So thanks for quoting my avatar. Hopefully if Ross sees, he'll be able to take some cues.

JGS said:
It didn't bother me until the end where it was jarringand served no purpose. Doing it when the games started was great.
Click to expand...

Yah, I loved that bit. There the shakey cam served a purpose; Ross was stylistically channeling the chaos in order to disorient the audience. That's sort of what Nolan was going for in Batman Begins, as well. Successful or not, it served a point. The rest of it, especially towards the end, like you said, was jarring.
 
border said:
By finding slightly different ways to make action indecipherable?
Click to expand...

My point was that he changed his approach to action in his subsequent films. Ross hopefully will too. Don't get me wrong. I didn't dislike all the action; none of it was horrible, and some sections, like the opening of the games, worked very well with the shaky cinematography. Also, I don't mean to harp on the film overall; I really enjoyed it. Huge surprise for me.
 
Secret_Riddle said:
-Lead guy sucked. Hemsworth and him should have switched roles..although this is coming from someone who hasn't read the books.
Click to expand...
Sadly I think I'm going to chalk most of Peeta's performance up to poor writing. He could have done better, but he was also given shit material. A lot of them were. The one thing about the sequels that I am looking forward to the most is a new screenwriter. I think it will do wonders for the movie.
 
IDK, I think Hutcherson is a pretty weak actor in comparison to Lawrence. I don't know about Hemsworth but i think he fit the role of gale nicely in that they do seem to have chemistry. I think they should have went with a stronger lead for Peeta though.
 
Last week, the Hungers Games was:

#1 Movie
#1 Book
#1 Album

Punching downE the competition in every medium.


JGS said:
IDK, I think Hutcherson is a pretty weak actor in comparison to Lawrence. I don't know about Hemsworth but i think he fit the role of gale nicely in that they do seem to have chemistry. I think they should have went with a stronger lead for Peeta though.
Click to expand...
And the disparity between Hutcherson and Lawrence will only grow bigger as they share more screen time in Catching Fire.

I continue denying Hemsworth as Gale.
 
Is there anything cool or exciting about the sequel, Catching Fire? I enjoyed the movie a great deal, but bringing back the characters for HUNGER GAMES ALL STARS EDITION seems like the most boring and predictable route to go. Is there more to it than that?

I guess I'm a little confused about why the public in Panem buys into the Hunger Games at all, when it's so flagrantly and openly manipulated by the event's organizers. What's the point of getting excited about it or even rating the combatants when they can be killed at the whim of the control room? I even saw a board with odds listed! Who the hell is betting on the Hunger Games? Would you bet on a horse race if the people running the race could just kill a horse if they thought it was performing too strongly?
 
border said:
Is there anything cool or exciting about the sequel, Catching Fire?
I enjoyed the movie a great deal, but bringing back the characters for HUNGER GAMES ALL STARS EDITION seems like the most boring and predictable route to go.
Is there more to it than that?
Click to expand...
Yes, half the book is set in the Districts where the story moves in a more political direction.

The dynamics in those Hunger Games are entirely different. It feels like a retread at first (I remember being annoyed as well), but then the Games become something else entirely. Not to mention the arena is awesome.


Edit: spoilering justin case.
 
General impressions:

I liked the movie better than the book, oddly enough. Jennifer Lawrence brought a human element to Katniss that I really liked, and that I didn't get so much in the books. I also was afraid that the romance elements would be shoehorned in and distracting, but they actually managed to do that well.

The shakycam thing I didn't mind so much during fights; action should be disorienting from the POV of characters. I hated the beginning, though, because it seemed like there was way too much movement during the establishing shots of D12 and Katniss.

I also thought they could have done more with the announcer conceit. Like, I would have been okay with them filming more scenes like it was a reality show, with weird camera angles from hidden cameras and more explanations on strategies and characters and stuff. Foxface was clever, but unless you read the books I don't think you'd be able to appreciate how clever she was.

Thresh and Cato was a missed moment of awesome. It was implied in the books to be an epic, long battle between two incredible physical specimens, and Katniss didn't see it because, well, she wasn't there. In the movie, though, Thresh (or as anyone who saw the movie without knowing the books would say, "that black dude") gets eaten by a dog. What.

Largely, though, it was entertaining. I'll probably watch the sequels. Maybe they work better as movies, too.
 
Just saw it earlier. I liked it for the most part, hated the overuse of the shaky cam but I get its purpose.

I didn't read the books, so I walked in without any knowledge of the books outside of what people told me and the trailers. I might just read the books now to get a better understanding of things.

So, with Katniss and Peeta being the "star-crossed lovers", I'm assuming Katniss was just using that to garner support from the outside for aid? She didn't seem invested from a romantic angle, but more so to keep Peeta alive so they can win the game. Correct me if I'm wrong.

I'm also assuming a love triangle is essentially established with Gale and becomes a pretty big deal in the next book and movie? Guy who she grew up with vs. guy who she had this crazy experience with. Decisions, decisions!

And Rue's death was actually pretty damn sad. Probably one of the best scenes in the movie. The other guy who saved Katniss from getting stabbed by the knife girl came out of nowhere, and suddenly died near the end. Did he have more of a role in the book?
 
I really want to watch this movie again, besides the shaky cam, the dumb cave/love scene. I felt like Lawrence gave an amazing performance and was simply astounding. The raffle in the beginning was just perfect, the first moments of the battle was also great, only time the shaky cam made sense.
 
Blablurn said:
4/10

can't remember the last movie that bored me so much :( probably transformers 3. sucks. i expected more. more entertainment. the beginning was nice. but the survival itself... was pretty boring. woody was nice though.
Click to expand...

wait til you watch wrathofthetitans (don't go see it). I literally got so bored I fell asleep. In a 640pm session after work. Wasn't even that late.
 
Quick said:
Just saw it earlier. I liked it for the most part, hated the overuse of the shaky cam but I get its purpose.

I didn't read the books, so I walked in without any knowledge of the books outside of what people told me and the trailers. I might just read the books now to get a better understanding of things.

So, with Katniss and Peeta being the "star-crossed lovers", I'm assuming Katniss was just using that to garner support from the outside for aid? She didn't seem invested from a romantic angle, but more so to keep Peeta alive so they can win the game. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

Yes.
Although, she did care for him a lot.

Quick said:
I'm also assuming a love triangle is essentially established with Gale and becomes a pretty big deal in the next book and movie? Guy who she grew up with vs. guy who she had this crazy experience with. Decisions, decisions!
Click to expand...

It only really becomes a bigger deal in Mockingjay.

Quick said:
And Rue's death was actually pretty damn sad. Probably one of the best scenes in the movie. The other guy who saved Katniss from getting stabbed by the knife girl came out of nowhere, and suddenly died near the end. Did he have more of a role in the book?
Click to expand...

Kind of, yeah.
Katniss only sees him in the arena that one time at the Feast, but he doesn't die suddenly. He takes Cato's bag along with his after killing Clove, and then Cato goes after him. After a couple of days, Peeta and Katniss are chilling in their cave and they see his face shown in the sky. He was presumably killed by Cato.
 
Just saw this. Some brief impressions. Overall I enjoyed it.

I was pulled in from the very beginning. Jennifer Lawrence is a star. She makes the whole picture work. But why did she like that douchey fucking kid that threw her bread in the rain? Kid is a douche and her romance with him felt forced to me.

I thought the choice of going handheld was a pretty good idea. It gave the movie a kind of raw immediacy. Ross seemed more at home in the District 12 scenes and in the actual outdoors games scenes than anywhere else though.

I liked how Ross seemed to be evoking imagery from the Holocaust but I was surprised to see how well fed everyone looked. I mean aren't these people supposed to be starving? They looked very healthy and very well fed. Broke the illusion for me.

Was the budget on this movie small because its vision of the future felt undercooked and small-minded in its imagination. Visuals were iffy, felt second-rate. Wasn't crazy about the production design (the wacky futuristic clothing style and hairdos). Fifth Element did it a lot better. The Capitol looked like something out of a videogame.

About the actual games themselves how were they able to manipulate the physical world? Didn't get that. And unless I missed something I don't believe it was ever explained. How did they just create fire on the spot and make dogs out of thin air? Seemed silly to me. I was hoping Katniss would have created a wider revolt and the movie would have went in that direction (maybe in the sequels?). I thought the human drama was very strong and I was surprised to see it being a pretty hard PG-13. There are some very difficult moments in the movie and Ross didn't shy away from them. Overall I liked it but it could have used some more polish and a little more word building.
 
It was...not bad at all. Jennifer Lawrence was really great but I felt like the rest of the actors, except maybe Rue, were just coasting. I dunno.

And yes, the shaky cam was pretty obnoxious.
KuGsj.gif
 
JB1981 said:
Man enough already about the shaky cam. It was really that distracting to you the people complaining about it?
Click to expand...

Yeah, it was distracting and annoying. I was frustrated in the final action scene.

It was bad, quick cuts/shaky cam is the lamest thing.
 
JB1981 said:
Just saw this. Some brief impressions. Overall I enjoyed it.

I was pulled in from the very beginning. Jennifer Lawrence is a star. She makes the whole picture work. But why did she like that douchey fucking kid that threw her bread in the rain? Kid is a douche and her romance with him felt forced to me.

I thought the choice of going handheld was a pretty good idea. It gave the movie a kind of raw immediacy. Ross seemed more at home in the District 12 scenes and in the actual outdoors games scenes than anywhere else though.

I liked how Ross seemed to be evoking imagery from the Holocaust but I was surprised to see how well fed everyone looked. I mean aren't these people supposed to be starving? They looked very healthy and very well fed. Broke the illusion for me.

Was the budget on this movie small because its vision of the future felt undercooked and small-minded in its imagination. Visuals were iffy, felt second-rate. Wasn't crazy about the production design (the wacky futuristic clothing style and hairdos). Fifth Element did it a lot better. The Capitol looked like something out of a videogame.

About the actual games themselves how were they able to manipulate the physical world? Didn't get that. And unless I missed something I don't believe it was ever explained. How did they just create fire on the spot and make dogs out of thin air? Seemed silly to me. I was hoping Katniss would have created a wider revolt and the movie would have went in that direction (maybe in the sequels?). I thought the human drama was very strong and I was surprised to see it being a pretty hard PG-13. There are some very difficult moments in the movie and Ross didn't shy away from them. Overall I liked it but it could have used some more polish and a little more word building.
Click to expand...

It was an arena, where everything (I'm assuming) is partly artificial. So, they're able to manipulate it as they please. The fire was started because Katniss was getting too close to the edge (I think). And their technology is advanced enough to create monster dogs in no time.

The first shot of the Capitol you see in the train reminded me a bit of Romulus from Star Trek: Nemesis, the Capitol skyline reminded me of Coruscant from Star Wars, and some of the other shots reminded me of the Citadel from Mass Effect.
 
The whole culture surrounding the games, the flamboyant hosts, the self-aggrandizing sponsors, the ridiculous looking citizenry of the capital - all these things were great. When it got away from that, I found myself getting pretty bored.

They really ought to re-imagine a Running Man themed movie again.
 
I felt the movie started strong, but kinda fell apart once the games actually began.

Shaky cam aside, my main criticism would be that very few of Katniss's choices seem purposeful, and events seem to just "happen" around her, usually to either ensure her survival and/or maintain her morality.

Her first kill? A wasp nest that just so conveniently comes into her attention in the morning (despite her being a skilled hunter) thanks to a little girl. Obviously, in a game where only one winner emerges, people in temporary alliances trust each other and enemies enough to ALL fall asleep next to each other. And in letting loose that nest, it just so happens that the girl WITH the bow trips up and dies so Katniss can take it. Technically, it was self-defense, so she and the audience don't have to feel too torn up about it.

She's saved from the difficult choice of having to eventually kill the little girl, thanks to some random guy who does it for her. Well, it was self-defense/retaliation for killing a small child, so that's okay too! The guy who saves her from the knife chick? Well, he conveniently spares her just so he can be conveniently killed off screen so he won't be a problem later. The clever girl who didn't appear to go out of her way to hurt anyone? She just so happened to steal and eat the berries that Peeta just happened to pick which happened to be poisonous.

Hell, the last guy was killed when he was tossed off the cornucopia by Peeta, who by the way, was the one who declared his intention to maintain his morality in the first place. Sure, Katniss ended it, but his death was a foregone conclusion at that point.

I gotta say, though, Katniss's actress did a fantastic job, especially during the pre-game drama.
 
I know this is only tangentally related, but I'd like Collins to write a spinoff book about Cato's PoV throughout the games. An Ender's Shadow type of dealie. He's there for most of the important events of the first book as well as some that aren't documented. It'd be neat to get a different take on the whole event from a well to do district citizen.
 
JB1981 said:
Just saw this. Some brief impressions. Overall I enjoyed it.

I was pulled in from the very beginning. Jennifer Lawrence is a star. She makes the whole picture work.
But why did she like that douchey fucking kid that threw her bread in the rain? Kid is a douche and her romance with him felt forced to me.
.
Click to expand...

spoilers dude.
in the book; she + her family were near starving and his bread saved her life - it also led her to the realisation that she should hunt + gather dandelions to use as ingredients and survive. Btw she liked him because they were in the same district and in the game together. The romance really isn't real. She was playing for the camear

@lesath. can't really respond to any of that; because I don't think your reasoning if any makes sense/logic - those were the circumstances and that's how it played out.
re rue. kat killing rue? did you NOT get that they were in an alliance and rue saved her earlieR? Killing rue? I shake my head

anyhow.
 
Saw it again, still really enjoyed it besides the shaky cam.

My theater was literally full, pretty sure this will have a great 2nd weekend.

2nd book = WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOW.

Started the 3rd book, will finish it by Sat/Sun.
 
Pachterballs said:
@lesath. can't really respond to any of that; because I don't think your reasoning if any makes sense/logic - those were the circumstances and that's how it played out.
re rue. kat killing rue? did you NOT get that they were in an alliance and rue saved her earlieR? Killing rue? I shake my head

anyhow.
Click to expand...

Uh, wasn't that the point of the Hunger Games? That there would be one winner? Alliances, therefore, would be temporary institutions until they were no longer convenient. Let's say, for example, they kept Peeta alive to track Katniss. Well, they chased her up a tree, so why did they keep him alive? Much less, trust him enough to fall asleep around him while his district partner was in the ropes? Along the same vein, Rue may have saved Katniss, but their alliance, too, would have been fleeting.

Unless, you REALLY think that had Rue made it to the end, that Katniss wouldn't be forced with the difficult decision? Hell, wasn't that an issue at the very end until Peeta and Katniss decided on the brilliant idea of trying to die together? Am I truly the one missing something here?

Please, if the book can offer more insight to this, please embellish me with details. Otherwise, the movie presents it in a way that is a nigh-comical sidestep to what would have amounted to an incredibly difficult decision for the main character.

Regardless, "those were the circumstances" is a really poor rebuttal for an accusation for inordinate amounts of asspull in the movie. Of course, I have not read the books, but you would not seriously expect me to for proper criticism of the film, right?
 
border said:
Is there anything cool or exciting about the sequel, Catching Fire? I enjoyed the movie a great deal, but bringing back the characters for HUNGER GAMES ALL STARS EDITION seems like the most boring and predictable route to go. Is there more to it than that?

I guess I'm a little confused about why the public in Panem buys into the Hunger Games at all, when it's so flagrantly and openly manipulated by the event's organizers. What's the point of getting excited about it or even rating the combatants when they can be killed at the whim of the control room? I even saw a board with odds listed! Who the hell is betting on the Hunger Games? Would you bet on a horse race if the people running the race could just kill a horse if they thought it was performing too strongly?
Click to expand...

It's not that different from today's Reality Show genre where the contestants who the producer will make a 'better story' usually have favorable edits and airtime. Only in the Arena, they control the odds of your survival
 
I saw the movie and liked it generally, but I do have some questions.

First, why are the people who live in the capital or whatever so different, creepy, and generally menacing?

I mean I get why the society is set up as it is, but these people don't act like they're from a different social class, but rather another planet. And I'm not even talking about the dress, which is odd enough. Almost everyone is portrayed as demented or evil.

Also, does the rest of the world exist in the Hunger Games universe? Like, is there a France or Japan or anything?
 
Lesath said:
Uh, wasn't that the point of the Hunger Games? That there would be one winner? Alliances, therefore, would be temporary institutions until they were no longer convenient. Let's say, for example, they kept Peeta alive to track Katniss. Well, they chased her up a tree, so why did they keep him alive? Much less, trust him enough to fall asleep around him while his district partner was in the ropes? Along the same vein, Rue may have saved Katniss, but their alliance, too, would have been fleeting.

Unless, you REALLY think that had Rue made it to the end, that Katniss wouldn't be forced with the difficult decision? Hell, wasn't that an issue at the very end until Peeta and Katniss decided on the brilliant idea of trying to die together? Am I truly the one missing something here?

Please, if the book can offer more insight to this, please embellish me with details. Otherwise, the movie presents it in a way that is a nigh-comical sidestep to what would have amounted to an incredibly difficult decision for the main character.

Regardless, "those were the circumstances" is a really poor rebuttal for an accusation for inordinate amounts of asspull in the movie. Of course, I have not read the books, but you would not seriously expect me to for proper criticism of the film, right?
Click to expand...


In the book, Peeta finishes off that little girl who started the fire in the movie and got killed. The one that the careers were making fun of when they walked under Katniss in the tree. So that helped them trust him. And in the book, the girl from 1 I believe (the one who died from the jackers while carrying the bow) was supposed to be on watch duty but fell asleep. So they didn't really trust him so much they all fell asleep around him, someone was supposed to stay up. Also, Haymitch talks a bit in the book and the movie about how careers are usually arrogant. They probably just didn't think Peeta would be able to do anything to them.

The alliances do all eventually crumble obviously but in the books she is never really thinking that far ahead. She thinks about having to potentially kill Rue eventually but decides not to dwell on it and just help each other survive. It's more of an issue before the games start in regards to Peeta. Because when the games begin, she quickly is tricked into thinking he's betrayed her, and then she has other things to think about. And then of course eventually its said they can both win.

They don't really decide to die together at the end, it's just a gamble with their lives against the Capitol's need for a victor to be declared. That they'd rather have two people basically break the rules and win than have no winner at all.
 
Speevy said:
I saw the movie and liked it generally, but I do have some questions.

First, why are the people who live in the capital or whatever so different, creepy, and generally menacing?

I mean I get why the society is set up as it is, but these people don't act like they're from a different social class, but rather another planet. And I'm not even talking about the dress, which is odd enough. Almost everyone is portrayed as demented or evil.

Also, does the rest of the world exist in the Hunger Games universe? Like, is there a France or Japan or anything?
Click to expand...
Actually I didn't see them as menacing. They are people who don't have a care in the world and as a result they focus on their own pleasures rather than the concerns of the districts. They don't really know much about the other districts. All of the Capital citizens are born there unless they are Peacekeepers. I imagine they look like we look from the eyes of a 3rd world country.

The first book is designed to make them look worse, but again it has a lot to do with ignorance and the Hunger Games being the norm for their whole lifetime. The Capital literally doesn't know as much as the other districts in regards to how Snow rules.

EDIT- As far as the rest of the world, I don't think the book says. Honestly, I'm not sure if Panem is all of the States as the geography is fuzzy. It could be that Panem is the only thing to have survived whatever put them in that position.
 
Just finished reading book3.

unlike most people throughout the thread; I thought it was pretty satisfying and I didn't really understand the whole
constantly drugged out comments - the equivalent would be the trio in HP hiding out in the wilds in the last book for months while hunting the final horcruxes. I didn't know what I expected reading that complaint - drugged? but how she wrote it up was great

really thought:

MAJOR SPOILERS BOOK3.
that katniss ending up with Peeta was great (dandelion of life. I loved it!!)
can't believe they killed finnick :(
coin getting killed was a surprise
that Peeta went mental was great
pulled no punches with characters dying left right in the tunnels; and pulled no punches when they blew up all the kids.
death of prim :(

really dug the 3rd book. Book 2 was the best though. I can't wait to see the completed movies (1-4) now. Hutcherson is going to have to up his acting chops for book3.
 
Pachterballs said:
JMAJOR SPOILERS BOOK3.
that katniss ending up with Peeta was great
can't believe they killed finnick :(
coin getting killed was a surprise
pulled no punches with characters dying left right in the tunnels; and pulled no punches when they blew up all the kids.
death of prim :(

really dug the 3rd book. Book 2 was the best though. I can't wait to see the completed movies (1-4) now. Hutcherson is going to have to up his acting chops for book3.
Click to expand...
Those are the reasons I preferred Book 3 over 2.
 
Pachterballs said:
Just finished reading book3.

unlike most people throughout the thread; I thought it was pretty satisfying and I didn't really understand the whole
constantly drugged out comments - the equivalent would be the trio in HP hiding out in the wilds in the last book for months while hunting the final horcruxes. I didn't know what I expected reading that complaint - drugged? but how she wrote it up was great

really thought:

MAJOR SPOILERS BOOK3.
that katniss ending up with Peeta was great (dandelion of life. I loved it!!)
can't believe they killed finnick :(
coin getting killed was a surprise
that Peeta went mental was great
pulled no punches with characters dying left right in the tunnels; and pulled no punches when they blew up all the kids.
death of prim :(

really dug the 3rd book. Book 2 was the best though. I can't wait to see the completed movies (1-4) now. Hutcherson is going to have to up his acting chops for book3.
Click to expand...

Most seem to dislike the third book, but I agree with you in all points. I thought it was pretty great, although very different in tone when compared to the first two.

Catching Fire is still my favorite, though.
 
Lesath said:
Uh, wasn't that the point of the Hunger Games? That there would be one winner? Alliances, therefore, would be temporary institutions until they were no longer convenient. Let's say, for example, they kept Peeta alive to track Katniss. Well, they chased her up a tree, so why did they keep him alive? Much less, trust him enough to fall asleep around him while his district partner was in the ropes? Along the same vein, Rue may have saved Katniss, but their alliance, too, would have been fleeting.

Unless, you REALLY think that had Rue made it to the end, that Katniss wouldn't be forced with the difficult decision? Hell, wasn't that an issue at the very end until Peeta and Katniss decided on the brilliant idea of trying to die together? Am I truly the one missing something here?

Please, if the book can offer more insight to this, please embellish me with details. Otherwise, the movie presents it in a way that is a nigh-comical sidestep to what would have amounted to an incredibly difficult decision for the main character.

Regardless, "those were the circumstances" is a really poor rebuttal for an accusation for inordinate amounts of asspull in the movie. Of course, I have not read the books, but you would not seriously expect me to for proper criticism of the film, right?
Click to expand...

you want to pick apart character motivations... and you're sort of basing all that on suppositions; except that's a nomenclature and not worth discussing.
 
Lesath said:
Uh, wasn't that the point of the Hunger Games? That there would be one winner? Alliances, therefore, would be temporary institutions until they were no longer convenient. Let's say, for example, they kept Peeta alive to track Katniss. Well, they chased her up a tree, so why did they keep him alive? Much less, trust him enough to fall asleep around him while his district partner was in the ropes? Along the same vein, Rue may have saved Katniss, but their alliance, too, would have been fleeting.
Click to expand...
They kept Peeta alive because there were still people to kill outside the alliance.

The issue of how to kill when it's not in your nature permeates the whole story. Kat doesn't want to kill anyone and feels sorry even for the "bad kids". She has no intention of killing Rue who is like her sister and her primary goal s to rescue Peeta.
The Games don't allow you to think in terms of the big picture unless you're a Career. It's not really like Survivor where everyone volunteered to be there and thus have a plan on how to win. Rue & Foxface are perfect examples of this.
Please, if the book can offer more insight to this, please embellish me with details. Otherwise, the movie presents it in a way that is a nigh-comical sidestep to what would have amounted to an incredibly difficult decision for the main character.
Click to expand...
The book does highlight Kat's conflict with the games, but I think the movie and the book make it pretty clear that you do what you need to do to survive and particularly show Kat as being against the Capital more than against her competitors.
 
Scarecrow said:
I know this is only tangentally related, but I'd like Collins to write a spinoff book about Cato's PoV throughout the games. An Ender's Shadow type of dealie. He's there for most of the important events of the first book as well as some that aren't documented. It'd be neat to get a different take on the whole event from a well to do district citizen.
Click to expand...
I heard someone suggest they do a prequel book/movie from Haymitch's perspective.

That'd be pretty neat, as we finally get to see what he did in the arena to make him an alcoholic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

What's the funniest scene ever?
2 3
101
685
Dr.Morris79 replied
  • Poll
You ever had your eyebrows threaded?
43
640
AJUMP23 replied
  • Poll
Tropic Thunder is undeniably the best comedy ever made.
2 3
114
705
RavenSan replied
THE SURFER | Official Trailer | Nicolas Cage | In theaters May 2nd
23
1K
DKehoe replied
Caught Stealing – Official Trailer | Dir. Darren Aronofsky
10
182
Ammogeddon replied
Top Bottom