Movie: The Hunger Games

Movie: The Hunger Games
Director: Gary Ross
Release Date: March 23, 2012
Studio: Lionsgate
Starring: Jennifer Lawrence & Josh Hutcherson

After recently reviewing the novel The Hunger Games, I felt the need to review the film that just came out. I saw it opening night (no not with the crazy people who went at 12:01 am) and with the book fresh in my mind, there were things that I both liked and disliked in the film. If you haven’t seen the movie this might be a good time to stop reading this post. Though I don’t plan to give too much away, I will probably mention some things that might ruin the movie experience for you.

Now I have heard that a lot of people who haven’t read the books absolutely loved it. And to be honest, this does not surprise me. It seems that this book was written to one day become a film. I would also like to mention that I am not one of those fanatical “book to film” haters who completely trash any movie that is not line for line to the book. I know that films can’t be an eight-hour remake of the novel.

Likes:

1. Jennifer Lawrence plays the lead role of Katniss Everdeen, a sixteen-year-old girl from District 12 who offers herself up as tribute to replace her sister from a certain death. Lawrence’s portrayal of Katniss is how I imagined it. Her character is strong and a good example to other girls. She also looks way better with brown hair than she does in real-life as a blond. The role of Peeta was also portrayed very well. There was much criticism by super fans over the casting of Josh Hutcherson. He is shorter with dark brown hair, but the dye job was perfect (like Lawrence, maybe they should stick to their character’s hair colouring) and the best part is the kid can actually act. I have seen him in a few other roles and he does a great job. I was glad that he showed up all the people who doubted him. Some other notable roles were Woody Harrelson as Haymitch Abernathy, Elizabeth Banks as Effie Trinket, Stanley Tucci as Caesar Flickerman, and Wes Bentley as Seneca Crane.

2. In the book, the story is told from Katniss’ point of view. We hear her thoughts and see what she sees. Unlike the book, the movie couldn’t have the main character talking aloud and giving away her position in the Games. As a result, the director showed the point of view of the gamemakers to explain certain aspects of the Games. It was interesting to watch the gamemakers and really worked to the film’s advantage. It wasn’t in the book, but it became a great addition to the story.

3. Again, we are taken out of Katniss’ point of view and we are able to see what the audience is watching on the screen at home. With the colour commentary given by Caesar Flickerman, it gave the moviegoer a realistic view as someone from the audience. With all the reality television we are watching, it really drove home the idea that it was a television game. This lacked in the reading of the book.

4. The sets were extremely well done. They were just how I imagined them (except for the cornucopia). They didn’t skimp anywhere. The poverty of the districts, the elegance of the Capitol, and the arena’s forest were perfect.

5. The romantic scenes between Katniss and Peeta in the film were actually better then the ones in the book. Why? I think it might have been because again we aren’t in Katniss’ head during the film and don’t have to listen to her awkward back and forth. In the book, the reader is dying for Peeta because at some points she is acting for the cameras and other times, she is actually showing true feelings. In the film, the viewer feels like she might actually care for him and isn't playing a role.

Dislikes:

1. The director packed too much in the last 30 minutes of the film. I remember looking at my watch when Katniss discovers Peeta by the river and realizing that there were at least 100 pages of the book left with only 30 minutes of film to go. As a result, things got shortened or worse, they were completely cut out. There was a lot that happened in those last few pages.

2. Some scenes would have been worth omitting to give more time to more important parts. With all the back and forth of the Mockingjay pin, it may have just been easier to pay an actress to play the role of Madge. Her character isn’t that important, but it is more about what the pin represents in future books. I mean the last book is called Mockingjay.

3. There wasn’t enough time spent with little Rue. Katniss spends a few days with Rue, but her role in the film was really not much more than 10 minutes… maybe 15 minutes. I was a Rue fan so I would have liked to have seen more, but the little girl who portrayed her was great.

4. I didn’t like the depiction of the mutts. In the book, they are described as having the eyes of the dead tributes. That aspect of the book wasn’t even touched upon. Also with all the technology available in films today, I would have thought they would have been more realistic and life-like. I mean even real dogs would have been better. 

5. Overall, I was kind of left wanting more. It definitely wasn’t a bad book to film adaptation, but maybe I just went in expecting too much. Something was missing.

I think this will definitely be the most successful of the three films as this was the best of the three books. The other two books were great, but the author’s ideas weren’t as original as in the first novel.

Now that I have written about The Hunger Games for both the book and film, I will wait to review Catching Fire and the Mockingjay. Besides it will give me an excuse to read the series again.