Hunger Games thoughts
Saw it last night....
[Spoiler (click to open)]
Okay, I've read books, and really enjoyed them. To me, the highest compliment you can pay a writer is that the resolutions of story elements are suspenseful while being told, but obvious in hindsight, and in all three books Collins pulled that off.
While some may argue that it's not fair to compare books to movies, the fact is that if a book shows what a story can be, then it's part of the background you take with you into the movie, so it's fair game. In other words, if I go into the movie asking whether it compares favorably to Lord of the Flies, Hamlet or Network, then the original source material is in the mix, too.
Having said that, I think The Hunger Games movie compares very favorably to the original book, and stands on its own as a good movie, with a few caveats:
First, the good:
Finally, there's been a lot made about similarities to Battle Royale, a Japanese film about teenagers put on an island and forced to fight to the death. I've seen it and liked it. Netflix it. It's very good (although, be warned, it's very violent). But thematically, it's very different, and in a very different setting. Both stories glow from their own heat, so I don't see any reason to have to take sides.
[Spoiler (click to open)]
Okay, I've read books, and really enjoyed them. To me, the highest compliment you can pay a writer is that the resolutions of story elements are suspenseful while being told, but obvious in hindsight, and in all three books Collins pulled that off.
While some may argue that it's not fair to compare books to movies, the fact is that if a book shows what a story can be, then it's part of the background you take with you into the movie, so it's fair game. In other words, if I go into the movie asking whether it compares favorably to Lord of the Flies, Hamlet or Network, then the original source material is in the mix, too.
Having said that, I think The Hunger Games movie compares very favorably to the original book, and stands on its own as a good movie, with a few caveats:
First, the good:
- Katniss was perfect. Unless Jennifer Lawrence Lohans her opportunities away, she's got a hell of a career ahead of her.
- The violence. It was never going to Battle Royale or Kill Bill, the PG-13 rating being an economic necessity, but there were audible gasps (and no cheers) as the Games went on, as these children were shown actually killing each other. It was as graphic as it could be, which was as graphic as it had to be. In fact, since ultra-graphic violence is often associated with over-the-top stories that aren't meant to be taken seriously, toning down the violence actually gives it a sense of realism.
- Effie could have been irritating to the nth degree, but again, the performance saves it. Props to Elizabeth Banks for finding the subtext in that performance that kept Effie from being a joke.
- Lenny Kravitz nailed Cinna. Like Effie, this character needed an actor that could communicate the subtext, and Kravitz was both understated, but emotive.
- The direction was darned near perfect. The camera work did a good job filling in some of the blanks lost by internal narration. For example, during the pre-game interview scene with Katniss, her perspective shots were great. Whether it's your high school graduation ceremony or community playhouse production of Nunsense or the PowerPoint you have to show on last quarter's growth margins at the annual meeting in the Hilton Conference Center A, everyone's had the experience of stepping onto a stage and thinking, "Blagh, that's what it looks like from this side of a stage, and I hate it." Ross really did a good job switching perspectives.
- Panem felt fleshed out. With the handheld camera work in the agrestic, impoverished Districts, to the pristine, wealthy, futuristic utopia of the cities...wait, where have I seen that before? Was that Badger in the Hob? All kidding aside, they stole from the best (and perhaps some suggested viewing to the Hunger Games fandom....).
- Pacing: It didn't feel like 2 1/2 hours. The story kept moving, but never felt rushed.
- Without the internal dialogue, it's not obvious the extent to which Katniss' interactions were deliberately played to the cameras. Her conflicted feelings about Peeta are a major part of her character, and while they try to imply some of it, it's not clear enough. Haymitch's note let her know she could be seen in the cave, and let us know that she knew it, but the extent to which she was aware of it in the moment was lost. A lot is made of how The Hunger Games was a social commentary on war, television, etc., but part of what worked so well in the novel was that it was filled with great metaphors for the challenges of young adulthood. Teenagers (and teenage girls specifically) who are learning to have romantic relationships feel intensely observed, particularly by their peers. Whether a 16 year old girl has been kissed, has a boyfriend, was asked to prom, etc. (I'll stop there before this post loses its own PG-13 rating), is a big part of her identity. Having Katniss "perform" with Peeta for the cameras, while very aware of the cameras, but while unaware of her own feelings despite the cameras, a lot of how this impacted Katniss was implied, but not properly developed.
- Speaking of teenage metaphors, three lines of dialogue from Katniss to her mother about sacking up to take care of Prim were also not enough. We really needed to see Katniss in charge of that house. Katniss is the child who loses the ability to be a child, because her parents are either absent or lacking, and she needs to step into that vacuum. This is a very common experience for children in dysfunctional families, and a big part of what helped make Katniss sympathetic.
- Peeta: I don't know if the lack of chemistry between Peeta and Katniss was deliberate, but if it was, it was a mistake, and if it wasn't, it's a problem (a problem they better solve before they start filming again). Also, what the hell kind of cakes do people order in District 12? "For Timmy's birthday, we were thinking of a 'mud-tree-leaf' theme. Because he doesn't see enough of that all year. Can you do a cake with that?"
- The end game: Katniss plan was both more calculated and more desperate in the novel (especially since, in the book, she actually took the poison), and watering that down really hurt the impact. Having said that, the one part of the novel that didn't work on screen (and felt more than a little contrived in the book; although at least in the novel Katniss questions for a moment whether Peeta will turn on her) was to have the announcement revoking the rule change come after the death of Cato. If it had come earlier (for example, just as the muttations were released), the standoff at the top of the cornucopia has a much more interesting implication.
Finally, there's been a lot made about similarities to Battle Royale, a Japanese film about teenagers put on an island and forced to fight to the death. I've seen it and liked it. Netflix it. It's very good (although, be warned, it's very violent). But thematically, it's very different, and in a very different setting. Both stories glow from their own heat, so I don't see any reason to have to take sides.