![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
Hunger Games
So, I caved and went to see it (was planning on waiting a few weeks or so).
I'm not really sure what to think, to be honest. I LOVED the beginning, as Katniss trained and got prepared for the Games. And OMG Cinna was amazing!
But...I really think I should have seen the movie before I read the book. The things that stood out most in my mind were not as well done as I wanted them to be.
1) Haymitch was awesome, but in the books, he was even more of a drunk bastard, and I loved that about him.
2) Rue. I didn't like the movie version of her very well. I always pictured a weak looking girl who was incredibly smart at being able to help herself. In the movie, she was introduced too fast and she went from being stalker to friend too quickly. I wanted her to be more mysterious. I felt nothing when she died in the movie, but in the books I was sobbing like crazy.
3) As soon as the Hunger Games begin, it feels like we took a giant step away from Katniss' perspective. Some of the most tense parts of the book was the waiting every night to see who had died, and the cannon booms the moment someone passed (a few deaths happened and I heard no boom. It might have been there, but subtlety was not wanted).
4) Katniss gets something from her sponsor to drug Peeta so she could go to get medicine for him. In the book. Entirely missing from the movie. Though I'm not sure how it would have fit in, since I couldn't fathom why she wouldn't just up and leave him to get the medicine.
All those points are things that had stood out to me enough to remember them months later after I had finished the book (I forget details easily), and they were either missing, or very downplayed.
I also was disappointed in the close up shaky camera scenes during fights. Couldn't tell much of what was going on.
I did love the actress who played Katniss. She was lovely. Most of the cast was.
I just wish the movie had been stretched to three hours. That extra half hour would have made all the difference, to me at least. It did all go by really quickly, with no downtime at all, so it didn't feel two and a half hours.
All that said, I would still give it a 7/10 stars.
I'm not really sure what to think, to be honest. I LOVED the beginning, as Katniss trained and got prepared for the Games. And OMG Cinna was amazing!
But...I really think I should have seen the movie before I read the book. The things that stood out most in my mind were not as well done as I wanted them to be.
1) Haymitch was awesome, but in the books, he was even more of a drunk bastard, and I loved that about him.
2) Rue. I didn't like the movie version of her very well. I always pictured a weak looking girl who was incredibly smart at being able to help herself. In the movie, she was introduced too fast and she went from being stalker to friend too quickly. I wanted her to be more mysterious. I felt nothing when she died in the movie, but in the books I was sobbing like crazy.
3) As soon as the Hunger Games begin, it feels like we took a giant step away from Katniss' perspective. Some of the most tense parts of the book was the waiting every night to see who had died, and the cannon booms the moment someone passed (a few deaths happened and I heard no boom. It might have been there, but subtlety was not wanted).
4) Katniss gets something from her sponsor to drug Peeta so she could go to get medicine for him. In the book. Entirely missing from the movie. Though I'm not sure how it would have fit in, since I couldn't fathom why she wouldn't just up and leave him to get the medicine.
All those points are things that had stood out to me enough to remember them months later after I had finished the book (I forget details easily), and they were either missing, or very downplayed.
I also was disappointed in the close up shaky camera scenes during fights. Couldn't tell much of what was going on.
I did love the actress who played Katniss. She was lovely. Most of the cast was.
I just wish the movie had been stretched to three hours. That extra half hour would have made all the difference, to me at least. It did all go by really quickly, with no downtime at all, so it didn't feel two and a half hours.
All that said, I would still give it a 7/10 stars.
no subject
♥
no subject
I too wish I hadn't read the books before seeing the movie. I sat next to two gals in the theatre -- one who had read the books, and one who had not -- and the had not gal about came unglued in the dark. It was a treat watching her out of the corner of my eye as she flinched and fidgeted. The movie was a much more visceral experience for her, while I was watching it from a technical perspective…how good was the script? The acting? I would have given anything to be in her shoes, to experience the story for the first time.
If I like a movie, I go to the book because I crave more, as books are capable of delivering that. So, I've been advising my friends who have not read the books to see the movie straightaway.
The shaky camera work irritated me too…my thoughts during the opening scene: "Oh no, not THIS style of handheld again." but it leveled out and reappeared only in fits and starts. In the fight scenes, I thought it somewhat necessary (the filmmakers too, perhaps) because of the criticism the project was getting for the subject matter of children killing children. If the camera shakes and jerks about, they can't be accused of dwelling on the violence all that much.
I did notice and appreciate the lack of music, which had to have been a conscious decision by the filmmakers. I love music in movies when it's done right, but an ever-present, bombastic leit-motive a la Speilberg (and Peter Jackson, bless him) gets sooo tiring with all the emotional manipulations. The silence in Hunger Games was palatable, and really made the movie for me. I'm actually looking forward to seeing it again so I can pay more attention to that aspect.
That all being said, I'm looking forward to the next two installments. Thank you for your review!
I was dwelling on the fact that Katniss was a welcome addition to the pantheon of (to coin Joss Whedon's oft applied moniker) "strong female characters", and stumbled upon this little gem. Enjoy. I laughed my ass off…
http://thoughtcatalog.com/2012/an-imagined-girls-night-conversation-between-katniss-everdeen-hermione-granger-bella-swan-and-buffy-summers/
no subject
Thanks for the link lol! Was hilarious!
I have yet to read the other two books. I think I will do that and then skip the movies. Or at least read the critical reviews first of them to see what people complain about.
As long as no blood was involved in the fighting, I don't see why it needed to be shaky-cam.
My mom refers to the movie as the one 'where kids kill each other'. I try to correct her, but technically it's true, even though a lot of the kids were assholes ;)
no subject
Mayhap I was redlisted because of the word use: a$$. Must clean up my language!
no subject