-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The Hunger Games (Dir. Gary Ross) |OT| May The Odds Be Ever In Your Favor
- Thread starter Replicant
- Start date
- Status
ReturnOfTheRAT
Member
Just finished watching it. I'd give it a 7.5/10. There were relationship building moments from the books that were excised here, which caused events towards the end of the movie to be more hollow than they should have being. Thinking about it, they could have put some, not all of those scenes in to flesh that stuff out. I mean, the credits for this seem to go on forever. Speed them up and you could pepper in 5 more minutes for character development. But there's nothing that can be done about that now.
Just like the book, I wished there were more scenes with Haymitch and Effie. I could watch Woody and Elizabeth banter all day as those characters. They were a lot of fun and a good counterbalance to the serious stuff needed out of everyone else. Stanley Tucci? you da man. Gobble up all that scenery. Props to Lenny Kravitz for making the most out of his limited time. Jennifer was great as always. She was the smart choice for Katniss and the scene where
is proof that. This is handled far better in the movie than the book.
A lot of the budget went into the costuming, world building and the game makers lair. I can forgive them for the "girl on fire" entrance and a green screen shot at the end that felt like it was tacked on in a rush. Those are the only bits that looked questionable to me.
I'm eager to see how Francis Lawrence handles the elements at play in "Catching Fire" for the follow up.
Just like the book, I wished there were more scenes with Haymitch and Effie. I could watch Woody and Elizabeth banter all day as those characters. They were a lot of fun and a good counterbalance to the serious stuff needed out of everyone else. Stanley Tucci? you da man. Gobble up all that scenery. Props to Lenny Kravitz for making the most out of his limited time. Jennifer was great as always. She was the smart choice for Katniss and the scene where
she confronts Peeta about his love for her and pins him up against the wall
A lot of the budget went into the costuming, world building and the game makers lair. I can forgive them for the "girl on fire" entrance and a green screen shot at the end that felt like it was tacked on in a rush. Those are the only bits that looked questionable to me.
I'm eager to see how Francis Lawrence handles the elements at play in "Catching Fire" for the follow up.
triplestation
Member
My friends dragged me into watching this. And boy was it a drag. If this film impresses anyone over the age of 5 I will be speechless.
I watched the movie this week and I quite enjoyed it. I knew nothing about the Hunger Games before I watched the movie and I wasn't expecting the kind of world it was set in at all. The movie felt like there were pieces missing in places with the relationships of people and some events that might've happened.
It made me want to read the books so that I can get more detail about everything and I'm looking forward to the next movie in the series.
It made me want to read the books so that I can get more detail about everything and I'm looking forward to the next movie in the series.
Evolved1
make sure the pudding isn't too soggy but that just ruins everything
Finally watched this... didn't really like it. Honestly I thought it sucked pretty hard.
I've already seen The Running Man and this movie was basically that, but neck deep in pre-teen girl drama...
Favorite part of the movie was Elizabeth Banks. I wasn't especially fond of the lead... guess she was alright, but no one I'll remember in a couple weeks. Also, I really do not like Lenny Kravitz so every scene with him was gross.
I've already seen The Running Man and this movie was basically that, but neck deep in pre-teen girl drama...
Favorite part of the movie was Elizabeth Banks. I wasn't especially fond of the lead... guess she was alright, but no one I'll remember in a couple weeks. Also, I really do not like Lenny Kravitz so every scene with him was gross.
Just finished it. So it's basically Lord of the Flies meets The Truman Show? I thought it was decent. Really dragged during some parts but the concept was fun and it was done adequately I suppose. It did feel kind of unresolved at the end, though.
MasterOfPastures
Banned
Fox Mulder
Member
neither did I until the credits. She caked on the makeup and accent.
This has probably been addressed in this thread already but I'm going to ask anyway- what the hell were those creatures at the end, and where did they come from? I assume some kind of genetically modified pig-wolf hybrid demon thing? And how were they supposed to have materialized out of the ground? Am I thinking too hard about it?
Escape Goat
Member
Evolved1
make sure the pudding isn't too soggy but that just ruins everything
I guess you weren't playing close attention? It was some kind of technology... like holodeck or some shit... they conjured up all sorts of crap during the movie. Remember the fire storm? Or how the changed day to night? And gift packages? All of that was "programed".
Yeah, I don't get it either. Movie was better than I was expecting.
Escape Goat
Member
What was the point of the "fire will not hurt you" and "Girl on fire" and then they create simulated fire and shes batshit scared and getting third degree burns?
Alright, finally watched it.
The movie wasn't that long, so to me it was a pretty gaping flaw that they didn't spend any time developing the other contestants. This wouldn't have taken much time at all, and they had a great opportunity to do it during the training, scoring, and interview scenes. All they would have needed to do was make sure the audience knew the names and a few details about some of the other contestants. They only did this with Rue and with the girl from District 1, but there were 4-5 other Tributes who should have been developed a bit.
The movie wasn't that long, so to me it was a pretty gaping flaw that they didn't spend any time developing the other contestants. This wouldn't have taken much time at all, and they had a great opportunity to do it during the training, scoring, and interview scenes. All they would have needed to do was make sure the audience knew the names and a few details about some of the other contestants. They only did this with Rue and with the girl from District 1, but there were 4-5 other Tributes who should have been developed a bit.
Evolved1
make sure the pudding isn't too soggy but that just ruins everything
I guess it wasn't real fire that she was wearing? It was a different effect? Just cosmetic? I don't know. I didn't read the books or anything... just watched the movie.
To me fashion fire and holodeck were separate things...
Finally JUST watched this film and I would have to disagree. I will say that some of the deaths had some emotional impact but a vast majority of them were just kids dying on screen.
Still not sure which one I prefer though. I liked the fact that BR focused on multiple stories and they also delved into what it was like for the game makers. HG was too much watching Katniss do nothing. It didn't help that the movie felt completely handcuffed by the book. It was such a faithful adaptation that it ended up being rather hom hum in the end because I never felt like I was seeing the directors vision.
BR has the edge in some aspects but I also found it a bit challenging to follow. Who loved who and who had a crush on which and who was where. Like I said, I appreciated that it wasn't all focused on one person but that's also why I found it all so confusing. The lead up the game was weak as well. I didn't really care about any of those kids yet throughout the film, I was constantly being told that I should. They tried to jam too much emotion into single scenes and it just didn't work. Part of me feels like if there were less violence, the movie wouldn't be as strong overall. The situation felt more real as a result of how bloody it was. In the HG, it always kind of felt like they were playing paintball.
They were. The fire in the game was real. The fire on her dress was created by Lenny Kravitz.
Holograms don't explain something that physically interact with the people. Were the creatures mechanical? Biological?
Correct, it was "cosmetic" fire. They explain it in the book, but I don't remember if they say anyting about it in the movie...
Biological, they are genetically created mutants.
Escape Goat
Member
Well, I get that the flames weren't real. But I'm talking about the movie dealing with subtext and exploring themes rather than throwing out dialogue for no real reason and creating fancy SFX shots for their own sake.
Wait what?
In the book the animals used by the capital are supposed to be
genetically engineered mutants called mutts for short. The dogs are supposed to be part wolf and part human. They look like wolfs for the most part, but they're able to balance on their hind legs and their eyes were engineered to resemble the eyes of each of the dead tributes.
I don't think they materialize out of the air in the book, they use tubes to get them in/out of the arena iirc. In the movie it looks like they're able to just teleport stuff into the arena.
I felt like the movie just glossed over her arrival/entrance into the capitol and the importance of playing to the public compared to the book. In the book they make it clear early on that the pageant is important cause the bigger splash you make, the more favor you'll win with the public/gamemakers. For District 12, they usually get shitty stylist and boring coal themed costumes so her stylist comes up with the plan to set her on fire and pushes the moniker of "the girl on fire" as a marketing campaign.
In the second book
Katniss' behavior in the first book (taking her sisters place in the games, wearing the mockingjay pin, whistling rues song when she dies and giving out the three finger salute, threatening suicide with Peeta at the end when the rules are changed) has made her in to a symbol against the capitol and "the girl on fire" persona is heavily pushed by the rebels propaganda campaign.
Just saw this. Knew nothing about it going in.
I liked it way started and got me really interested into the world, the setting and the society. Then halfway through they had to force a relationship which after finishing the movie still dont know if its genuine or was it just to get audiences. The ending went on way too long plus surprised how crappy the CG was for a bigger budget movie. I came in hoping it had the gritty feel of Children of Men but came away it felt like Twilight.
I liked it way started and got me really interested into the world, the setting and the society. Then halfway through they had to force a relationship which after finishing the movie still dont know if its genuine or was it just to get audiences. The ending went on way too long plus surprised how crappy the CG was for a bigger budget movie. I came in hoping it had the gritty feel of Children of Men but came away it felt like Twilight.
Yep I pretty much felt the same. Really liked the setting and the first half. Right about the time that they decided to start the tenny love crap though it got boring. And stayed boring for a good while, and only mildly recovered at the end of the movie.
But overall I still liked it, and definitely would like to see what happens next, especially if that book spoilered text above about the second book is true. Sounds like it would focus more on the stuff I cared about.
jonnyp
Member
Agree with everything you wrote, although I don't think BR is good either.
Probably the folks literally saying this is "the worst movie they have ever seen".
ShadyMilkman
Banned
I actually liked the first half of the movie more than I did the actual games. I haven't read any of the books, so I found the lore to be somewhat interesting.
But, once the games started, I couldn't help but think "Battle Royale did this a lot better."
Despite that, I'd say I enjoyed it, but it didn't really hook me.
But, once the games started, I couldn't help but think "Battle Royale did this a lot better."
Despite that, I'd say I enjoyed it, but it didn't really hook me.
It's still a YA book, but it's definitely a bit grittier. The deaths are conveyed in more detail. If they had filmed the book exactly as it was written, it probably would have earned an R rating.
Also, in the book, the other Tributes are developed a bit more. They're still relatively undeveloped as characters, but at least you know who the main players are and a little bit about them.
Good concept but the execution was quite lacking. Everything feels half-baked, no one besides the two leads get any character development, and even with them it's rather poor. Also, the main girl couldn't act at all.
Also a lot of stuff helped them that was unearned, like them just happening to have the one costume designer to think up fake fire clothes. Or the girl climbs a tree that just happens to have trapper jackers(lol) on them.
Also a lot of stuff helped them that was unearned, like them just happening to have the one costume designer to think up fake fire clothes. Or the girl climbs a tree that just happens to have trapper jackers(lol) on them.
I nearly fell out when they said the name of those things. Cant believe noone came up with a better name.
So I read the book right before watching the movie and I have to say the movie was quite disappointing.
No Character development
The best parts of the book were not communicated into the movie at all.
FX looked B movie ish.
I just hope they go a different direction with the next film.
No Character development
The best parts of the book were not communicated into the movie at all.
FX looked B movie ish.
I just hope they go a different direction with the next film.
Andvary
Member
I did the same thing and found both the book and the movie boring.
The Last One
Member
pretty damn boring.
The Last One
Member
Set Pictures for the Catching Fire:
More here: http://omelete.uol.com.br/em-chamas/cinema/jogos-vorazes-em-chamas-tem-novas-imagens-de-bastidores/
High-quality logo:
More here: http://omelete.uol.com.br/em-chamas/cinema/jogos-vorazes-em-chamas-tem-novas-imagens-de-bastidores/
High-quality logo:
Maleficence
Member
Thought it was pretty rubbish. The special effects seemed cheap and I didn't like the look of the film in really any part of it.
The relationships were awfully put together and the characters were rubbish on the whole also. Friendships and rivalries were formed for no real reason, just because.
It's probably on of the worst movies I have seen in a good while, very little of it was enjoyable or entertaining.
The relationships were awfully put together and the characters were rubbish on the whole also. Friendships and rivalries were formed for no real reason, just because.
It's probably on of the worst movies I have seen in a good while, very little of it was enjoyable or entertaining.
j_k_redtail
Member
I guess since the last post is only a couple months old, I can bump this without feeling like a necroposter.
I read the book a couple years ago, and hadn't seen the movie yet - looks like my initial concerns were well grounded.
I'd like to start with what I liked. The movie (like the book, IMHO) really picks up when it moves into the arena, when the film shifts genres: it starts as a satirical look at reality television, and becomes survival horror. I was actually surprised at how tense I was during the final countdown, and at how much I winced during that first dash toward the Cornucopia. There isn't a lot of character development in the movie, but you don't need much to feel sorry for the 24 Tributes. That said, it would have been nice to know a bit more about Cinna, Gale (what, three minutes of screentime?), Haymitch, whatsherface with all the makeup, and even Katniss herself. And Peeta... not even sure what to think.
Now I'm straying into "things I didn't like." So here's the bad: Before the arena, they really fail to create a convincing world. There are two aspects to this: the cast, and the setting.
The cast: There was some early controversy about the casting choices, with some saying that Jennifer Lawrence's figure was too 'womanly' for the role of Katniss. I think that's a bit unfair. She plays the part well - and I think the criticism is reflective of the fact that a female lead is going to catch flak about her appearance, much more so than a male lead. So it goes. That said: everyone in this movie... looks like a movie star. Even in the arena, Katniss doesn't have a single hair out of place. Peeta and Gale look like twin Adonises, cut from stone. Granted, a life of hard work would do wonders for anyone... but then, this is supposed to be a dystopian fantasy. Teenagers don't look like this in 2013, and the world hasn't ended. Why does everyone look so well-groomed and well-fed?
And the setting: We don't see much of any of the districts, nor do we really see much of the Capitol. They could have a better job fleshing out the setting to better paint the contrast between District 11 and the Capitol itself. In the book, it is an honor to be selected as a Tribute. It is an escape (however brief) from the suffering of your home District. The movie doesn't do a great job at conveying that suffering. Apparently hairdressers are less creative, and they don't have light rail.... so what? This is really remarkable to me because there isn't a great reason to shield the viewer from "suffering." This is a movie where children kill each other in some pretty gruesome ways. But presumably, the Games are not the only terrible aspect of life in Panem. Why not show us that?
In short: the arena is great. Everything else feels like an afterthought. I'd give it 6/10. It is worth seeing. It really is not worth seeing a second time. Hopefully the second movie does a better job at addressing its faults.
I read the book a couple years ago, and hadn't seen the movie yet - looks like my initial concerns were well grounded.
I'd like to start with what I liked. The movie (like the book, IMHO) really picks up when it moves into the arena, when the film shifts genres: it starts as a satirical look at reality television, and becomes survival horror. I was actually surprised at how tense I was during the final countdown, and at how much I winced during that first dash toward the Cornucopia. There isn't a lot of character development in the movie, but you don't need much to feel sorry for the 24 Tributes. That said, it would have been nice to know a bit more about Cinna, Gale (what, three minutes of screentime?), Haymitch, whatsherface with all the makeup, and even Katniss herself. And Peeta... not even sure what to think.
Now I'm straying into "things I didn't like." So here's the bad: Before the arena, they really fail to create a convincing world. There are two aspects to this: the cast, and the setting.
The cast: There was some early controversy about the casting choices, with some saying that Jennifer Lawrence's figure was too 'womanly' for the role of Katniss. I think that's a bit unfair. She plays the part well - and I think the criticism is reflective of the fact that a female lead is going to catch flak about her appearance, much more so than a male lead. So it goes. That said: everyone in this movie... looks like a movie star. Even in the arena, Katniss doesn't have a single hair out of place. Peeta and Gale look like twin Adonises, cut from stone. Granted, a life of hard work would do wonders for anyone... but then, this is supposed to be a dystopian fantasy. Teenagers don't look like this in 2013, and the world hasn't ended. Why does everyone look so well-groomed and well-fed?
And the setting: We don't see much of any of the districts, nor do we really see much of the Capitol. They could have a better job fleshing out the setting to better paint the contrast between District 11 and the Capitol itself. In the book, it is an honor to be selected as a Tribute. It is an escape (however brief) from the suffering of your home District. The movie doesn't do a great job at conveying that suffering. Apparently hairdressers are less creative, and they don't have light rail.... so what? This is really remarkable to me because there isn't a great reason to shield the viewer from "suffering." This is a movie where children kill each other in some pretty gruesome ways. But presumably, the Games are not the only terrible aspect of life in Panem. Why not show us that?
In short: the arena is great. Everything else feels like an afterthought. I'd give it 6/10. It is worth seeing. It really is not worth seeing a second time. Hopefully the second movie does a better job at addressing its faults.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked