I hunger for 'The Hunger Games'
I do believe I've found my newest interest. Though I can't be 100% sure because I only saw the movie yesterday and I have not read the book. But I like to think that a true testament to a good movie based on other source material is how understandable and enjoyable it is even to newcomers. Wikipedia and Google gave me the basics of the book plot and you can probably tell what's coming...
Yes it's one of those long reviews I like to give about fandoms that interest me. I would consider it penance for my long absence from LJ, you know, if I didn't like to type so much. I hope this will interest even one person who wonders what someone who hasn't read the book but did see the movie, thought of it.
Let's get the bad out of the way first.
Cons:
- Text Intro (and other text).
I'll just say it right now, this is more of a personal issue. Ever since 'The Last Airbender' live action movie adaptation of a brilliant cartoon, I've had a terrible fear of text in the opening scene. Or maybe it's just a bitter distaste but fear sounds much more appropriate for the "epicness" of the Hunger Games. Though I'm glad the text is short and there's no narration, the following scenes afterward with a mutely-colored village, gave me some serious 'Last Airbender' Earth Kingdom/Northern Watertribe flashbacks. I'll be so happy when 'The Legend of Korra' comes out to dull the memories. As for the text in the corner that identified "District 12", to me it was a bit glaring and out of place. Couldn't they have a banner on the stage or some signs within the town scenes identifying this district as well as the later "District 11"?
- Shaky Cam.
So much shaky cam! I think the effect they were going for was the confusion and frenzy of war, like 'Saving Private Ryan' but that might be a bit overkill for the majority of teenagers who see this (I know many adults enjoy this but still, you gotta look at the main audience). There were some points in the District 12 town scenes where I had to turn away because it was making me dizzy (and we weren't even at the fighting scenes yet!) When the Games actually start, all that blurry shaky cam really ruined the action. The director could've struck a better balance between atmospheric jitteryness and quick but clear shots of the contestants fighting. Nothing's worse than missing out on some action because you're motion sick in your own theater chair. The only time it would've been appropriate and even effectual to shaky cam the hell out of a scene was after the female protagonist got stung by some weird hallucinogenic bees but since they used shaky cam so much previously, they had to ramp it up by putting weird motion effects and ghosting jump cuts... which leads me to my next point.
- Odd Cuts.
I'm being nitpicky about the technical stuff, I know, but when else can I call upon my artsy fartsy scholarly film knowledge? There's something called the "180 degree rule" where a scene is filmed from one side, especially if there's people in it. An example is if you have Person A, on the left, talking to Person B, on the right. It's confusing to the brain when, all of a sudden, Person A is on the right and Person B is on the left because the camera is now "looking at them" from the other side of the room. You can find out more by Googling it. Now, I get that it's probably, once again, more of a stylistic choice on the director's part but his splicing and cuts kind of threw me at first. The blue flashback cuts also come to mind for the non-180 degree rule-breaking. Now, I've seen this flashback cut technique done really nicely in a beloved television show (*coughCommunitycough*). I assume it's a flashback scene because it's melancholy blue with rain and it seems to imply the the protagonist, Katniss, has seen/encountered the male lead, Peeta, sometime before they were chosen for the Games. Don't know if it was a week prior or maybe even longer; I just know it was raining hard and bits of that flashback were put in every time Katniss and Peeta have a moment, sorta. The director could've definitely presented the short, wordless flashback as one scene or at least spaced it closer together.
Now for the flip side.
Pros:
- Atmosphere/Emotion.
I must admit, after getting over the screen having a seizure, I initially thought to myself that the village parts were slowing down the movie. Wasn't this supposed to be about a frenzied, sadistic hunting Battle Royale? (Not to be confused with the movie many internet people like to say the 'Hunger Games' plagiarized.) But rethinking it, I do sort of like those grim, District 12 town scenes, especially cut between the field/forest scenes. When the kids where marched to the town's square I was reminded of 'The Lottery', an equally bleak short story which has no flashy, futuristic Capitol to liven things up later. And even in the Capitol, for all it's bright colors and nifty gadgets, we get some serious quiet moments and reflection. The sadness and senselessness of it all was handled the best; I was actually choked up when Katniss's little ally was killed by that spear (I probably should've warned about spoilers.). The uprising in District 11 was one of the few fantastic uses of shaky cam because I don't think it was used too much and it lended to the anger and frenzy a young death can bring. Even the more positive emotions, which were much more sparse than the heavier, sad ones, came through very well on the screen.
- Characters.
Emotion of a movie is only as effective as the actors/characters who can pull them off. Sure, they can play haunting lyrical music over slow-mo scenes and position innocent children haphazardly around a field for that extra punch in the gut, but it's the wavering eyes on an otherwise stoic young girl, the significant window-side speeches, or the laughs drawn from a quirky little tree-climbing girl that brings the most emotion and gets us invested. (In fact, the entire audience, myself included, broke into applause when the District 11 boy killed that cruel knife-throwing girl to avenge the death of that petite District 11 climber. It was awesome for so many reasons.) What I was most proud and impressed to see was such a great, different leading lady in an fantasy, action-type flick. She projects serious certainty but we see moments where she's so afraid, she's actually trembling. Both male co-stars had some great scenes despite not having too much screentime with Katniss (Gale having less so than baker-boy Peeta). I liked how Gale really projects his feelings with his eyes but Peeta has really got a way with words. I can only imagine how these characters come across in the book which brings me to...
- Plot/Story.
Can I really comment on a story when I didn't read the book? That's like critiquing a painting with one eye covered but I like to go with what an old professor told me and separate the movie from the book as if they're two different versions of the same story. The basic plot they were trying to get across was very interesting to me. The idea of a dystopian future on the verge of rebellion. The brave, spirited heroine who's also young and human. It's good though it borders on cliché, or it would, if not for the wildcard of the manufactured "starcrossed lovers" angle. Now, I have my fair share of fantasy/sci-fi shows and movies that I enjoy; in some I'm one of those swoony, squealing shippers (X-Files, Buffy, Avatar: The Last Airbender) and in others I watch mainly for the plot and the character interactions (Supernatural, Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter). For this movie, I was bit indecisive. The little touches of romance had me smiling and I wavered between wanting a little more romantic drama (poor Gale watching Katniss kissing Peeta) and satisfied the kickass main story wasn't sidetracked by a love triangle (unlike a certain vampire/cardboard-cutout/werewolf story. Seriously, who would compare this to 'Twilight'??)
Now, I've seen all over the internet how book fans are complaining the movie left out several scenes but you know, that's what movies do. Even with more than 2 hours at their disposal, this movie had to tell a story that would take most people about 6 hours to read, minimum. But it left me wondering and wanting to know more. Is the book this dark and sad? What scenes did they leave out? What scenes did they change or add? Are some characters different in the book than they are in the movie?
So yeah, good movie but I look forward to reading the book which (going with my former Harry Potter experiences) I'm sure will be even better. Can't wait!
Yes it's one of those long reviews I like to give about fandoms that interest me. I would consider it penance for my long absence from LJ, you know, if I didn't like to type so much. I hope this will interest even one person who wonders what someone who hasn't read the book but did see the movie, thought of it.
Let's get the bad out of the way first.
Cons:
- Text Intro (and other text).
I'll just say it right now, this is more of a personal issue. Ever since 'The Last Airbender' live action movie adaptation of a brilliant cartoon, I've had a terrible fear of text in the opening scene. Or maybe it's just a bitter distaste but fear sounds much more appropriate for the "epicness" of the Hunger Games. Though I'm glad the text is short and there's no narration, the following scenes afterward with a mutely-colored village, gave me some serious 'Last Airbender' Earth Kingdom/Northern Watertribe flashbacks. I'll be so happy when 'The Legend of Korra' comes out to dull the memories. As for the text in the corner that identified "District 12", to me it was a bit glaring and out of place. Couldn't they have a banner on the stage or some signs within the town scenes identifying this district as well as the later "District 11"?
- Shaky Cam.
So much shaky cam! I think the effect they were going for was the confusion and frenzy of war, like 'Saving Private Ryan' but that might be a bit overkill for the majority of teenagers who see this (I know many adults enjoy this but still, you gotta look at the main audience). There were some points in the District 12 town scenes where I had to turn away because it was making me dizzy (and we weren't even at the fighting scenes yet!) When the Games actually start, all that blurry shaky cam really ruined the action. The director could've struck a better balance between atmospheric jitteryness and quick but clear shots of the contestants fighting. Nothing's worse than missing out on some action because you're motion sick in your own theater chair. The only time it would've been appropriate and even effectual to shaky cam the hell out of a scene was after the female protagonist got stung by some weird hallucinogenic bees but since they used shaky cam so much previously, they had to ramp it up by putting weird motion effects and ghosting jump cuts... which leads me to my next point.
- Odd Cuts.
I'm being nitpicky about the technical stuff, I know, but when else can I call upon my artsy fartsy scholarly film knowledge? There's something called the "180 degree rule" where a scene is filmed from one side, especially if there's people in it. An example is if you have Person A, on the left, talking to Person B, on the right. It's confusing to the brain when, all of a sudden, Person A is on the right and Person B is on the left because the camera is now "looking at them" from the other side of the room. You can find out more by Googling it. Now, I get that it's probably, once again, more of a stylistic choice on the director's part but his splicing and cuts kind of threw me at first. The blue flashback cuts also come to mind for the non-180 degree rule-breaking. Now, I've seen this flashback cut technique done really nicely in a beloved television show (*coughCommunitycough*). I assume it's a flashback scene because it's melancholy blue with rain and it seems to imply the the protagonist, Katniss, has seen/encountered the male lead, Peeta, sometime before they were chosen for the Games. Don't know if it was a week prior or maybe even longer; I just know it was raining hard and bits of that flashback were put in every time Katniss and Peeta have a moment, sorta. The director could've definitely presented the short, wordless flashback as one scene or at least spaced it closer together.
Now for the flip side.
Pros:
- Atmosphere/Emotion.
I must admit, after getting over the screen having a seizure, I initially thought to myself that the village parts were slowing down the movie. Wasn't this supposed to be about a frenzied, sadistic hunting Battle Royale? (Not to be confused with the movie many internet people like to say the 'Hunger Games' plagiarized.) But rethinking it, I do sort of like those grim, District 12 town scenes, especially cut between the field/forest scenes. When the kids where marched to the town's square I was reminded of 'The Lottery', an equally bleak short story which has no flashy, futuristic Capitol to liven things up later. And even in the Capitol, for all it's bright colors and nifty gadgets, we get some serious quiet moments and reflection. The sadness and senselessness of it all was handled the best; I was actually choked up when Katniss's little ally was killed by that spear (I probably should've warned about spoilers.). The uprising in District 11 was one of the few fantastic uses of shaky cam because I don't think it was used too much and it lended to the anger and frenzy a young death can bring. Even the more positive emotions, which were much more sparse than the heavier, sad ones, came through very well on the screen.
- Characters.
Emotion of a movie is only as effective as the actors/characters who can pull them off. Sure, they can play haunting lyrical music over slow-mo scenes and position innocent children haphazardly around a field for that extra punch in the gut, but it's the wavering eyes on an otherwise stoic young girl, the significant window-side speeches, or the laughs drawn from a quirky little tree-climbing girl that brings the most emotion and gets us invested. (In fact, the entire audience, myself included, broke into applause when the District 11 boy killed that cruel knife-throwing girl to avenge the death of that petite District 11 climber. It was awesome for so many reasons.) What I was most proud and impressed to see was such a great, different leading lady in an fantasy, action-type flick. She projects serious certainty but we see moments where she's so afraid, she's actually trembling. Both male co-stars had some great scenes despite not having too much screentime with Katniss (Gale having less so than baker-boy Peeta). I liked how Gale really projects his feelings with his eyes but Peeta has really got a way with words. I can only imagine how these characters come across in the book which brings me to...
- Plot/Story.
Can I really comment on a story when I didn't read the book? That's like critiquing a painting with one eye covered but I like to go with what an old professor told me and separate the movie from the book as if they're two different versions of the same story. The basic plot they were trying to get across was very interesting to me. The idea of a dystopian future on the verge of rebellion. The brave, spirited heroine who's also young and human. It's good though it borders on cliché, or it would, if not for the wildcard of the manufactured "starcrossed lovers" angle. Now, I have my fair share of fantasy/sci-fi shows and movies that I enjoy; in some I'm one of those swoony, squealing shippers (X-Files, Buffy, Avatar: The Last Airbender) and in others I watch mainly for the plot and the character interactions (Supernatural, Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter). For this movie, I was bit indecisive. The little touches of romance had me smiling and I wavered between wanting a little more romantic drama (poor Gale watching Katniss kissing Peeta) and satisfied the kickass main story wasn't sidetracked by a love triangle (unlike a certain vampire/cardboard-cutout/werewolf story. Seriously, who would compare this to 'Twilight'??)
Now, I've seen all over the internet how book fans are complaining the movie left out several scenes but you know, that's what movies do. Even with more than 2 hours at their disposal, this movie had to tell a story that would take most people about 6 hours to read, minimum. But it left me wondering and wanting to know more. Is the book this dark and sad? What scenes did they leave out? What scenes did they change or add? Are some characters different in the book than they are in the movie?
So yeah, good movie but I look forward to reading the book which (going with my former Harry Potter experiences) I'm sure will be even better. Can't wait!