The Girl Who Was On Fire
I saw The Hunger Games today and now I am writing a post on it, with a birthday post probably coming tomorrow. Ironically, at almost exactly the same time last year, I was doing almost the exact same thing: posting about the Hunger Games trilogy with the intention of making my birthday post separate.
Cut for spoilers (movie spoilers only) and lengthiness.
I actually don't know how to feel about it. At first I felt pretty blasé about it, but the more I think about it, the more I realize it was a very beautifully executed film and any problems I have are my own nigglers.
Anyway. At first I felt kind of torn, actually. Some parts were really well done and some parts were just kind of meh. Overall, I thought it was all right but not spectacular. Well adapted but just didn't hit certain important notes with me. (Also it brought to my attention the weird pacing of the story itself.) However, my mom has never read any of the books and thought the movie was great; ditto my dad.
The best thing about the movie was the costumes/visuals. There were some EXCELLENT costumes throughout (I think we can all agree that Effie Trinket is spectacular, eyelashes to heels) and the colors and hairstyles just further emphasized the lighthearted couture decadence of the Capital, and the difference between the Capital and the outer districts. In terms of set and costume design, it was really beautifully done.
Mostly I felt some lacks in terms of emotional relationships. The very best part of the movie is the Reaping, when Katniss flips out and volunteers; it's very tense and very well done. I admired it even in the trailers. However, Katniss' other relationships--her friendships in particular--did not feel very full or explained. As Elyse put it, the actors seemed aware of the relationships, but we didn't see them developed. In brief:
Gale: I liked how he and Katniss were a team in the books. Like a hunting duo. Like they had each others' backs no matter what. Just didn't get that impression in the movie.
Cinna: Cinna is one of my favorites in the books. I thought he was very lovely in the movie, but in the books Katniss found him one of the few people she could trust due to his insistence on doing something new and beautiful. I liked that he found inspiration in Katniss' bravery, and they touched on that a little, but I didn't really buy that she felt so comfortable with and trusting of him so soon.
Haymitch: My favorite. My absolute favorite. First off, the casting of Woody Harrelson struck me as weird, but he seemed to do a nice job, all things considered. I liked him! I didn't think he was as repulsive as he should have been. Also, I really love his relationship with Katniss in the books. I like that they kind of hate each other but also that they are on the same level of understanding, that Katniss immediately gets his advice and that he knows just how to deal with her. I think they are fairly similar, and I like the advisor-advisee relationship they get going. Again: didn't see much of that.
The movie was two and a half hours as it was--not a lot of extra time for character development. You know, it didn't much hurt the movie as a whole (my mom had absolutely no problems with the movie); it was just one of my usual "why can't all my favorite characters be fully developed even when they are minor characters" complaint.
They changed the ending very slightly, but I'm guessing they’re saving that revelation for the next movie (assuming they make all three, and I hope they do, since it really is a trilogy--a story told in three parts), and I was okay with that.
The action scenes were filmed very close-up and in hand-held, making the action itself hard to follow.
I liked all the actors, the scenery, the overall depiction of the story. It brought home to me the fact that half the story is spent on primping and the other half on basically running around in the woods from one vague conflict to another; when you know how it's going to end it doesn't seem to tense or exciting. But that’s not the movie's fault!
I've read a lot of complaints around (not in-depth) about how people hate Katniss (books, not movie) and this baffles me. She has one of my favorite character traits, which is that she does whatever is necessary in order to achieve her goals. I LOVE THAT. She also doesn't get bogged down in romance (see this comic), does not excel at everything, and doesn't just boy up to prove herself a worthy warrior. She's not in it to prove herself a worthy warrior; she's in it to win by whatever means necessary. And I love that.
Some unexpected awesomeness: Wes Bentley as Seneca Crane and Stanley Tucci as Caesar Flickerman. Crane was basically the stage manager of the Hunger Games and it was kind of awesome. Plus his beard was just amazingly epic, and he had really nice, understated clothes, and I liked how they played up his role a little bit with his interaction with Snow and with Haymitch. And Stanley Tucci--I mean, I shouldn't have expected anything less from him, should I? The blue eyebrows were spectacular. His huge smile. His pandering to his audience. He just has been playing this game for a long time and he's so good at it and he gives the impression of loving it. He's just a great TV man. In particular I liked his first scene with Katniss, when she's wearing the flame gown. I also have a soft spot for Effie Trinket for being thoroughly herself--not evil or bad, looks spectacular and is so enthusiastic. She was very well done, though she didn't get to do much. I did like her one little character moment: *gasp* "That's mahogany!"
I didn't find Rue's death particularly moving, but Katniss' reaction afterwards was really good, and her salute to 11 and the following riots were nice. (Rue's father almost made me tear up.) I guess what I mean is that there were a lot of really good character moments throughout the whole movie, really small things that gave it further life and depth, and so it made the lacks in her relationships with Gale, Cinna, and Haymitch more obvious to me. But I think Haymitch is awesome, so. (I refuse to repost the tagline "may the odds be ever in your favor" on account of everyone is, but I have to say that every time someone said it in the movie I got chills.)
Really nicely done overall: all actors and visuals were lovely, but the plot dragged a little in places. I think this is due to the pacing of the story (it's necessary to devote time to primping and training, but then the Hunger Games themselves need at least as much time to develop tension and such, and then despite the drawn-out time in the arena, there is no single moment of triumph; it just kind of peters out) and not the fault of the movie.
(ALSO. It has been over a year since I read the trilogy, and even then I listened to them; I totally forgot that those wolves were supposed to be representative of the tributes that had already died!)
My original thought was that it was all right but not spectacular; reading this and writing this entry made me realize that maybe it was kind of really awesomely well done except for those three friendships I mentioned. I mean, it's subtle in places. But very thoughtfully and nicely executed.
My original post on the trilogy here. ALSO: I read on IMDB that Catching Fire is supposed to come out next year. This pleases me. I have heard pretty much nothing about this as a complete trilogy, but Catching Fire was my favorite. Let's round up all these bitchy and semi-useless adults and make them kill each other! Let's form new and different alliances! Let's set out on a political journey!
Cut for spoilers (movie spoilers only) and lengthiness.
I actually don't know how to feel about it. At first I felt pretty blasé about it, but the more I think about it, the more I realize it was a very beautifully executed film and any problems I have are my own nigglers.
Anyway. At first I felt kind of torn, actually. Some parts were really well done and some parts were just kind of meh. Overall, I thought it was all right but not spectacular. Well adapted but just didn't hit certain important notes with me. (Also it brought to my attention the weird pacing of the story itself.) However, my mom has never read any of the books and thought the movie was great; ditto my dad.
The best thing about the movie was the costumes/visuals. There were some EXCELLENT costumes throughout (I think we can all agree that Effie Trinket is spectacular, eyelashes to heels) and the colors and hairstyles just further emphasized the lighthearted couture decadence of the Capital, and the difference between the Capital and the outer districts. In terms of set and costume design, it was really beautifully done.
Mostly I felt some lacks in terms of emotional relationships. The very best part of the movie is the Reaping, when Katniss flips out and volunteers; it's very tense and very well done. I admired it even in the trailers. However, Katniss' other relationships--her friendships in particular--did not feel very full or explained. As Elyse put it, the actors seemed aware of the relationships, but we didn't see them developed. In brief:
Gale: I liked how he and Katniss were a team in the books. Like a hunting duo. Like they had each others' backs no matter what. Just didn't get that impression in the movie.
Cinna: Cinna is one of my favorites in the books. I thought he was very lovely in the movie, but in the books Katniss found him one of the few people she could trust due to his insistence on doing something new and beautiful. I liked that he found inspiration in Katniss' bravery, and they touched on that a little, but I didn't really buy that she felt so comfortable with and trusting of him so soon.
Haymitch: My favorite. My absolute favorite. First off, the casting of Woody Harrelson struck me as weird, but he seemed to do a nice job, all things considered. I liked him! I didn't think he was as repulsive as he should have been. Also, I really love his relationship with Katniss in the books. I like that they kind of hate each other but also that they are on the same level of understanding, that Katniss immediately gets his advice and that he knows just how to deal with her. I think they are fairly similar, and I like the advisor-advisee relationship they get going. Again: didn't see much of that.
The movie was two and a half hours as it was--not a lot of extra time for character development. You know, it didn't much hurt the movie as a whole (my mom had absolutely no problems with the movie); it was just one of my usual "why can't all my favorite characters be fully developed even when they are minor characters" complaint.
They changed the ending very slightly, but I'm guessing they’re saving that revelation for the next movie (assuming they make all three, and I hope they do, since it really is a trilogy--a story told in three parts), and I was okay with that.
The action scenes were filmed very close-up and in hand-held, making the action itself hard to follow.
I liked all the actors, the scenery, the overall depiction of the story. It brought home to me the fact that half the story is spent on primping and the other half on basically running around in the woods from one vague conflict to another; when you know how it's going to end it doesn't seem to tense or exciting. But that’s not the movie's fault!
I've read a lot of complaints around (not in-depth) about how people hate Katniss (books, not movie) and this baffles me. She has one of my favorite character traits, which is that she does whatever is necessary in order to achieve her goals. I LOVE THAT. She also doesn't get bogged down in romance (see this comic), does not excel at everything, and doesn't just boy up to prove herself a worthy warrior. She's not in it to prove herself a worthy warrior; she's in it to win by whatever means necessary. And I love that.
Some unexpected awesomeness: Wes Bentley as Seneca Crane and Stanley Tucci as Caesar Flickerman. Crane was basically the stage manager of the Hunger Games and it was kind of awesome. Plus his beard was just amazingly epic, and he had really nice, understated clothes, and I liked how they played up his role a little bit with his interaction with Snow and with Haymitch. And Stanley Tucci--I mean, I shouldn't have expected anything less from him, should I? The blue eyebrows were spectacular. His huge smile. His pandering to his audience. He just has been playing this game for a long time and he's so good at it and he gives the impression of loving it. He's just a great TV man. In particular I liked his first scene with Katniss, when she's wearing the flame gown. I also have a soft spot for Effie Trinket for being thoroughly herself--not evil or bad, looks spectacular and is so enthusiastic. She was very well done, though she didn't get to do much. I did like her one little character moment: *gasp* "That's mahogany!"
I didn't find Rue's death particularly moving, but Katniss' reaction afterwards was really good, and her salute to 11 and the following riots were nice. (Rue's father almost made me tear up.) I guess what I mean is that there were a lot of really good character moments throughout the whole movie, really small things that gave it further life and depth, and so it made the lacks in her relationships with Gale, Cinna, and Haymitch more obvious to me. But I think Haymitch is awesome, so. (I refuse to repost the tagline "may the odds be ever in your favor" on account of everyone is, but I have to say that every time someone said it in the movie I got chills.)
Really nicely done overall: all actors and visuals were lovely, but the plot dragged a little in places. I think this is due to the pacing of the story (it's necessary to devote time to primping and training, but then the Hunger Games themselves need at least as much time to develop tension and such, and then despite the drawn-out time in the arena, there is no single moment of triumph; it just kind of peters out) and not the fault of the movie.
(ALSO. It has been over a year since I read the trilogy, and even then I listened to them; I totally forgot that those wolves were supposed to be representative of the tributes that had already died!)
My original thought was that it was all right but not spectacular; reading this and writing this entry made me realize that maybe it was kind of really awesomely well done except for those three friendships I mentioned. I mean, it's subtle in places. But very thoughtfully and nicely executed.
My original post on the trilogy here. ALSO: I read on IMDB that Catching Fire is supposed to come out next year. This pleases me. I have heard pretty much nothing about this as a complete trilogy, but Catching Fire was my favorite. Let's round up all these bitchy and semi-useless adults and make them kill each other! Let's form new and different alliances! Let's set out on a political journey!