If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(IMDB)   Did anyone else see The Hunger Games this weekend? What did you think? (Warning: possible spoilers in thread)   (imdb.com) divider line 432
    More: Cool  
•       •       •

5244 clicks; posted to Main » on 26 Mar 2012 at 12:33 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



432 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-03-26 01:39:04 PM

Some 'Splainin' To Do: Kyro: Oh and I saw this movie several years ago when it was still called Battle Royale.

Yes. Congratulations on being familiar with an obscure, artsy Japanese title from 2000. We're all quite impressed, so here's your hipster merit badge.

Now, for bonus credit, let's all talk about the difference between plot and story and how the former is not the latter and how two films can use a similar theme while still being different works.


I am 99% sure he was making a joke about the 398579475 people that say that in every Hunger Game thread.

but carry on with your freak out
 
2012-03-26 01:39:42 PM
I thought it was pretty good. Convinced me to finally read the books....soon as i'm done with the latest Shadow book by Orson Scott Card.

As usual I had to suffer through the usual movie theater idiots. Some shiathead behind me would randomly start talking with his girlfriend. Then he would sometimes comment on what just happened in the movie. I would have said something to him, but he was rather large and had many tattoos. Judging by his overall attitude I don't think saying anything would have benefitted me at all.
 
2012-03-26 01:39:45 PM

homeschooled: They didn't do a good job of developing the enemy characters, though. Foxface and Cato got a LOT of page time, and in the film it took me a while before I even figured out who Foxface was. They didn't explain how she was a gatherer, so the GENIUS of her eating the berries didn't make much sense to my dad, who hadn't read the books. Once I explained it to him he was all, "ohhhh! that makes more sense now."

Also... SPOILER ALRT NO SERIOUSLY DON'T READ THIS I also thought it was weird that they didn't explain to the viewers that Katniss doesn't really love Peeta and was doing it all to survive. In the book it was super obvious, in the movie you left thinking she's in love w/ him.


I didn't read the book but I didn't really have any idea who the enemy charachters were or why the one ringleader dude was so badass. I kind of saw the enemies as that one dude and "everybody else". Kind of ruined the film for me but otherwise it was entertaining
 
2012-03-26 01:40:28 PM
Oh also, why do they use children?? Seems to me, even is dystopian future former america, these games would be played by men and women of legal age. Something like 18-35. Is it explained in the books why they choose children and not adults? Even thought i'm planning to read it, I'm really curious about this.
 
2012-03-26 01:41:31 PM

think_balance: 1. You're mostly right, but she admits to herself in the book (IIRC) that she shouldn't have expected anything less than them dying outright as the venom is very strong.


I should have submitted this thread when I wasn't at work so I could have actually looked stuff up.

think_balance: 2. One of the most powerful scenes in the book is her first kiss with Peeta - she says to herself that she doesn't know what she's doing as far as kissing goes as she's never been kissed. Keep in mind she's killed three people at this point. Three kills before her first kiss.


And they did, like, nothing with it in the movie. BOO. Hehe.
 
2012-03-26 01:41:53 PM
I won't be seeing it because I don't think hunger is anything to play around with. I'm talking about Africa and shiat.
 
2012-03-26 01:42:44 PM

Gilligann: As usual I had to suffer through the usual movie theater idiots. Some shiathead behind me would randomly start talking with his girlfriend. Then he would sometimes comment on what just happened in the movie. I would have said something to him, but he was rather large and had many tattoos. Judging by his overall attitude I don't think saying anything would have benefitted me at all.


What color of hoodie was he wearing?
 
2012-03-26 01:44:39 PM

Keigh: Oh also, why do they use children?? Seems to me, even is dystopian future former america, these games would be played by men and women of legal age. Something like 18-35. Is it explained in the books why they choose children and not adults? Even thought i'm planning to read it, I'm really curious about this.


It's punishment for daring to rebel 74 years ago. The best way to keep them in line is for them to sacrifice, but with a tinge of false hope behind that sacrifice.
 
2012-03-26 01:44:52 PM

DamnYankees: Carth: In a word were billions of people are wiped out by war, climate change and resource scarcity I don't think a fanfic map is the least believable part of the story.

Maybe, but if you're going to make a map, at least make it look realistic in its proportions and spacing. Like this one:

[www.myhungergames.com image 500x349]


Yea I like how the districts look on that one better but they don't match up as well with the book's descriptions. I'm sure someone will take the time to combine the accurate of one with the realistically of the other.
 
2012-03-26 01:45:13 PM

Keigh: men and women of legal age


Legal age according to *our* laws. Not the laws of Panem.

What's interesting in the books is that Katniss talks about how in the past, girls have entered the area in chariots bereft of clothing. The Capitol is overtly sexually girls we, as readers, would view as children.

Collins does this over and over in the first book - present us with characters who act and are treated like adults then remind us that we're reading about children / young teens.

Keigh: Something like 18-35. Is it explained in the books why they choose children and not adults? Even thought i'm planning to read it, I'm really curious about this.


IIRC - it's The Capitol saying, "We own you and we have the power to steal your children and make them kill for our entertainment."
 
2012-03-26 01:45:50 PM

Keigh: Oh also, why do they use children?? Seems to me, even is dystopian future former america, these games would be played by men and women of legal age. Something like 18-35. Is it explained in the books why they choose children and not adults? Even thought i'm planning to read it, I'm really curious about this.


Because they can. It's a straight-up power play, just one more act of denigration and cruelty to keep the black man down. They also force the winner(s) to go on tour at the six-month mark, with celebrations and re-runs in each district to rub their collective noses in it even more. Sadly, almost all traces of the absolute cruelty of the Capitol have been erased from the film. The monsters aren't attributed to the wartime genetic engineering and bioweapons programs, the Mockingjay isn't explained and it's a key plot device, the Avox punishment isn't even mentioned, the reasons for the electric fences aren't discussed... there were aspects of the books that made Panem sound a LOT more like North Korea, and that's all been erased.

For the previous nit-picker, that is *so* not a minor complaint; it the crux of the entire story.
 
2012-03-26 01:46:11 PM

thespindrifter: A real inconsistency was the lack of cannon fire over some of the Tributes' deaths. Uh, did we even see the same movie? YES THERE WERE TOO cannon firings! O_o?


There was no cannon fire for Rue, none for the kid standing guard at the food whose neck Cato snapped, and none for Cato at the end. Meanwhile, all of the other Tributes got cannon fire almost instantly after their deaths. In fact, my husband even asked if some were really dead since the cannon never fired. No big deal for me but technically an inconsistency.

The speed discrepancy was a minor annoyance, but not in light of the fact that they seemed to go through so much trouble to preserve certain other details to the letter. It's as if there were two different directors on this movie, and they slapped competing versions of it together: one an accurate portrayal that was faithful to the book, and another that was an artistic interpretation.

Still not at all a plot hole nor an inconsistency within the movie. Next.

Hell yes, Lover Boi not losing his leg is a big-ass problem for Book/Movie #2! Hell, the last third of the story, and a large chunk of book #2 revolve around Peeta's being slowed down, even after he learns how to live with an artificial leg.

They may skip that subplot entirely or just say that the initial wound is enough to slow him down. Or maybe they'll cut it off in the next movie. Again, how does any of that affect this movie itself?
 
2012-03-26 01:46:40 PM

Some 'Splainin' To Do: Kyro: Oh and I saw this movie several years ago when it was still called Battle Royale.

Yes. Congratulations on being familiar with an obscure, artsy Japanese title from 2000. We're all quite impressed, so here's your hipster merit badge.

Now, for bonus credit, let's all talk about the difference between plot and story and how the former is not the latter and how two films can use a similar theme while still being different works.


Trust me, this form of attack will not work. He's hardheaded, stubborn, and refuses to ever be wrong.
 
2012-03-26 01:47:32 PM

Some 'Splainin' To Do: Congratulations on being familiar with an obscure, artsy Japanese title from 2000. We're all quite impressed, so here's your hipster merit badge.


Battle Royale was neither artsy nor obscure. It was a B-movie popcorn gore flick. But I will wear your little spat of indignation with a small amount of pride.

Some 'Splainin' To Do: Now, for bonus credit, let's all talk about the difference between plot and story and how the former is not the latter and how two films can use a similar theme while still being different works.


A 'similar theme' would be another youth war, or an organized manhunt, or government oppression. This is about as 'similar in theme' as Avatar is to Ferngully. It's an outright clone.
 
2012-03-26 01:49:20 PM

DamnYankees: Carth: In a word were billions of people are wiped out by war, climate change and resource scarcity I don't think a fanfic map is the least believable part of the story.

Maybe, but if you're going to make a map, at least make it look realistic in its proportions and spacing. Like this one:

[www.myhungergames.com image 500x349]


Man, you're really invested in this for someone who was completely underwhelmed by a movie based on a book series you haven't read.
 
2012-03-26 01:50:43 PM

brigid_fitch: Again, how does any of that affect this movie itself?


It adds to the pile of other reasonable complaints that I have about how this was a shiat rendering of a book. Yes the book is always better, but it's like they didn't even try near the end. Soooo very many scenes were cut out, it's like a bad made-for-TV movie. For all the hype, this was as disappointing as Star Wars: Episode I
 
2012-03-26 01:50:56 PM

stevie1der: Man, you're really invested in this for someone who was completely underwhelmed by a movie based on a book series you haven't read.


I love movies. What can I say.
 
2012-03-26 01:51:43 PM

Keigh: Oh also, why do they use children?? Seems to me, even is dystopian future former america, these games would be played by men and women of legal age. Something like 18-35. Is it explained in the books why they choose children and not adults? Even thought i'm planning to read it, I'm really curious about this.


The author said she used children because she based it on the myth of Theseus & the minotaur.
 
2012-03-26 01:52:18 PM

stevie1der: Man, you're really invested in this for someone who was completely underwhelmed by a movie based on a book series you haven't read.


I actually understand his interest. I wasn't really impressed either, but I am very interested in the cultural tidal wave it's triggered. At the very least I'm pleased that the teenage literature crowd has moved up from Twilight.
 
2012-03-26 01:52:22 PM
I was going to post about one Hunger Games miracle, but I have just witnessed a second. So here goes:

Miracle 1: I watched a movie (the hunger games, duh) while sitting next to my stepmother (hates violence, loves children), wherein a child is impaled by a spear, and she didn't complain. That is a Fing film making miracle. I am still impressed. Wow.

Miracle 2: I read the whole first page of a Fark response thread about the Hunger Games, and there wasn't one serious troll attempt. 0.o
 
2012-03-26 01:53:58 PM

Slaves2Darkness: Yeah, but then you go on to read the rest of the Ender series and realize that Mormons really suck at writing anything other then thinly veiled Christian fiction.


I'm not sure how the solipsistic backdrop of Children of the Mind can be construed as Christian Fiction. But you're point is well taken.

More to the point is that the rest of the series is an actionless, wholly cerebral thought experiment and psychological profile exercise. A special director/writer would be required to turn them into a viable screen play. And how much of the story takes place as letters sent from person to person?

/And who the hell are you gonna get to play Ender at age 5? 10? 15?
 
2012-03-26 01:54:07 PM

thespindrifter: The shaki-cam was only for the first parts of the movie, to add to the grittiness and first-person feel, as if you're right there along for the ride. Once in the Capitol they backed off quite a bit.

MINOR quibbles?? I don't care that the movie wasn't graphic, I care that the character development was *completely gutted*.


Were you watching it on a screen that was 80 feet tall and 100 feet wide?

As I said, it could have worked on a smaller screen, where the shake is processed by your eyes into just a little bit of motion. Instead, on the huge screen, tracking a single character required physically moving your head from side to side. Add to that the stutter from 24FPS, and any scene panning a crowd (e.g. the reaction shots during the reaping) were a mess.

Plus, autofocus? Is it that hard to keep the main character in focus? I don't know about you, but even when I did sword fighting the world never turned blurry around me.

The characters were developed just fine. They did a good enough job managing the requirements of translating a book to a movie. And yes, you do have biatchy quibbles:
"Like one of the lead characters NOT losing a leg in the end. " - Because amputation is an important part of a movie and wouldn't have made that last scene on top of the cornucopia drag on forever.

"Like another lead character not becoming an even bigger town disgrace by drunkenly falling off the stage on live national TV. " - Because that would have really been worth the screen time for what is essentially a throw-away.

"Like a Maglev train that can go 300 MPH in the book being described as going 200 MPH in the movie. " - Look at all the farks I give:

"White people instead of olive-skinned ones." - REALLY? This is an actual complaint?

"Entire missing characters with their actions being given to other people, done probably solely in the interest of time compression. " - The art of making a good movie. I don't need to sit through a four or five hour drag because a director can't say "this really isn't important to the storyline overall."

"Stuff like the lead character's dad teaching her survival skills being totally absent, even as a flashback, and his death only being hinted at in an hallucination." - In the movie, you still get the idea that she's a hunter. You still understand she lives off the land in the woods. You still know that she hunts and sells to peacekeepers, even though gale warns her of the danger of doing so on a reaping day.

So yeah, I say you're biatching over quibbles. Newsflash: the movie is not the book. It is an adaptation of the book to the screen. If you want all of the trappings of a book, you're going to have to read it.

You were probably one of those people who complained that Jackson cut Tom Bombadil from LOTR. Eesh.
 
2012-03-26 01:54:12 PM
So in the great tradition of celebrity couples would Katniss and Peeta be...

Peeniss?

/I think so
 
2012-03-26 01:54:48 PM

parazen: I was going to post about one Hunger Games miracle, but I have just witnessed a second. So here goes:

Miracle 1: I watched a movie (the hunger games, duh) while sitting next to my stepmother (hates violence, loves children), wherein a child is impaled by a spear, and she didn't complain. That is a Fing film making miracle. I am still impressed. Wow.

Miracle 2: I read the whole first page of a Fark response thread about the Hunger Games, and there wasn't one serious troll attempt. 0.o


B*tches know not to troll my threads. :P
 
2012-03-26 01:54:58 PM

thespindrifter: brigid_fitch: Again, how does any of that affect this movie itself?

It adds to the pile of other reasonable complaints that I have about how this was a shiat rendering of a book. Yes the book is always better, but it's like they didn't even try near the end. Soooo very many scenes were cut out, it's like a bad made-for-TV movie. For all the hype, this was as disappointing as Star Wars: Episode I


See, I can understand you having complaints about the adaptation. But omissions from the book are not necessarily plot holes nor inconsistencies. I read the series, too, and really enjoyed it. I'm fine with some stuff they left out and annoyed by others. But, on its own, the movie's not bad. I think they did the best they could with 2 1/2 hours and trying to keep a PG-13 rating. It's never going on my list of favorite films but I'm still okay with it.
 
2012-03-26 01:55:52 PM
I mean it was either that or KatPee.
 
2012-03-26 01:58:09 PM

Kyro: Oh and I saw this movie several years ago when it was still called Battle Royale.


this. no interest in seeing battle royale and running man all over again.
 
2012-03-26 01:58:43 PM

Tawnos: So yeah, I say you're biatching over quibbles.


My only major nit about book / movie differences is the closing of the movie. An overarching theme in the series is Katniss' inability to discern who to trust. That starts to come out in the end of the first book.

Coupled with the hospital scenes in the close of the first book which I thought were well written.

Tawnos: You were probably one of those people who complained that Jackson cut Tom Bombadil from LOTR. Eesh.


Did you see Colbert interview Gaiman about that? Hilarious!!
 
2012-03-26 01:59:41 PM

Lyonid: Rome would like a word...

/tolerance doesn't always enter into the equation
//haven't seem the movie... maybe the power imbalance isn't as clear


The tie ins to Rome were a bit over done. The author picked names out or a hat but brought none of the character. Cato, Cinna, Ceasar.... Just missing an Octavian/Augustus/
 
2012-03-26 02:00:38 PM

Alpha Sierra Foxtrot: B*tches know not to troll my threads. :P


I'm not limited by silly little threads on the internet. You will be please to know that I am mailing her a box of poop in lieu of petty forum flaming.
 
2012-03-26 02:00:49 PM

Snort: The tie ins to Rome were a bit over done. The author picked names out or a hat but brought none of the character. Cato, Cinna, Ceasar.... Just missing an Octavian/Augustus/


I agree, it really seemed like they pulled names out of hat with no consideration as to what that name meant. For the life of me, I have no idea why you would name a brutal asshole killing kid "Cato". Makes no sense. Name him Sulla or something.
 
2012-03-26 02:00:58 PM
Saw the movie and read the book immediately after.

The movie was superior to the book, if only because I didn't have to suffer through 300 pages of overwrought angsty self-loathing whiny teenage bullshiat.

I'll even say the the movie did a superior job in the "show don't tell" department (of course, it has a huge advantage because it's a visual medium), and the cuts to other parts of the world helped frame the action in its larger context, giving you a sense of the scale of the story.

The omitted details were unimportant. Why does it matter that Katniss' mom was a healer? We don't need to know the origin of a particular personality facet - we just need to know that she possesses it. Unless her mom factors in there significantly, it's a detail that doesn't need to exist.

And it was pretty obvious that she was faking the affection with Peeta throughout the movie. AND, for what it's worth, she doesn't disavow having affection for him at the end of the book, either; she admits to not being CRAZY IN LOVE with him, but also admits to having confused feelings - which is EXACTLY the impression I got from the movie.

You could've ripped half of the angsty self-reflection from that book and had exactly the same story - at least for an adult. I understand that the target audience really needs to get into the character's head, so I understand why it was written the way it was. As an adult, I vastly prefer the movie re-telling of the book.
 
2012-03-26 02:01:11 PM

ConConHead: They had a FOOD STYLIST for this movie. A FOOD STYLIST.


And a Snake Wrangler. I saw no snakes. Maybe the lizard counts.
 
2012-03-26 02:01:48 PM
*wanders off to eat lunch*
 
2012-03-26 02:02:26 PM

Snort: The tie ins to Rome were a bit over done. The author picked names out or a hat but brought none of the character. Cato, Cinna, Ceasar.... Just missing an Octavian/Augustus/


Her prep team is made up of Octavia, Flavius, and Venia.

Was probably the trend at some point.
 
2012-03-26 02:03:19 PM

The_EliteOne: disappointing to see what District 9 sent....when they should have sent two of these

[static.tumblr.com image 300x386]


Well Played.
 
2012-03-26 02:03:29 PM

TheWhaleShark: The movie was superior to the book, if only because I didn't have to suffer through 300 pages of overwrought angsty self-loathing whiny teenage bullshiat.


I'm sorry; where you accidentally reading Twilight or Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix?
 
2012-03-26 02:03:43 PM

DamnYankees: stevie1der: Man, you're really invested in this for someone who was completely underwhelmed by a movie based on a book series you haven't read.

I love movies. What can I say.


Tip of that hat, keep doing what you love.

Kyro: stevie1der: Man, you're really invested in this for someone who was completely underwhelmed by a movie based on a book series you haven't read.

I actually understand his interest. I wasn't really impressed either, but I am very interested in the cultural tidal wave it's triggered. At the very least I'm pleased that the teenage literature crowd has moved up from Twilight.


It really is crazy how quickly this series got so huge. I play on a website that predicts box office gross by treating movies like stocks, and less than a year ago this film was predicted to make less than 100 million total. It's wild how the groundswell of interest appeared so fast and furious with only a moderate amount of marketing (compared to the average summer blockbuster).
 
2012-03-26 02:04:05 PM

Snort: Just missing an Octavian/Augustus/


There's an Octavia in the book.

DamnYankees: For the life of me, I have no idea why you would name a brutal asshole killing kid "Cato". Makes no sense. Name him Sulla or something.


People tend to be named after their districts. it's not 100% consistent and it takes some knowledge of word origins to pick up on it.

Sometimes it's obvious, though, like Glimmer and Marvel being from the luxury district...
 
2012-03-26 02:04:18 PM

Tziva: Some 'Splainin' To Do: Kyro: Oh and I saw this movie several years ago when it was still called Battle Royale.

Yes. Congratulations on being familiar with an obscure, artsy Japanese title from 2000. We're all quite impressed, so here's your hipster merit badge.

Now, for bonus credit, let's all talk about the difference between plot and story and how the former is not the latter and how two films can use a similar theme while still being different works.

I am 99% sure he was making a joke about the 398579475 people that say that in every Hunger Game thread.

but carry on with your freak out


I'm curious to know where your 99% confidence is coming from given that there was absolutely no indication of sarcasm in the original post.
 
2012-03-26 02:04:23 PM
I thought it was awful, they ruined the whole story.


Here's why:


*************SPOILER WARNINNNGGGG ********************

They completely left out Tom Bombadil. Didn't even mention him.
 
2012-03-26 02:04:38 PM
Five of us saw it on Friday. Four of us have read all three books and regardless of the movie the books are always better. Having read the books it is easier to figure out a few things and know why some other things occur.

Everyone thought they did a great job with the movie and we are looking forward to the extended version on DVD. We are planning on seeing it again in the IMax theater this weekend. One thing that really surprised me was how many people really got into the movie at the theater.

Spoiler Alert

One of my favorite scenes was when Katniss faced the camera and paid respect to District 11 and Rue's father lost his shiat and started a riot. I was really glad they showed that.

When Thresh avenged Rue the entire theater cheered and clapped.

Tracker Jacker scene was great.
 
2012-03-26 02:05:27 PM
Meh, when the Exorcist came out when I was in high school, it was all the rage. Parents protesting it showing and all kinds of Catholics up in arms. People rumored to have passed out, walked out, or thrown up at viewings, etc., etc., and hyped beyond any normal movie of its time. Then Jaws came out a few years later and the fan froth was all a popping on the media and the whole circus repeated. Once the spin doctors and sneaker pimps got a whiff of blood in the water, they wait patiently until a move such as this comes alone and then, they getcha. They getcha for the tickets, and they get ya for the popcorn and they get ya for the DVDs and clothing lines and McHappyMeals and whatever they can. And they keep taking and taking and you know what? Good for them. As long as there are sheep, they will need to be shorn.
Y'all need summer cuts, anyway.
 
2012-03-26 02:05:37 PM

Alpha Sierra Foxtrot: hitlersbrain: Kiddie books are for Kiddies.

And when you get over that tunnel vision and are finished reading all that Proust, perhaps you can enjoy something else.


I don't read books to show how 'cool' or 'smart' I am. I've read hundreds just for fun. (learned a lot by accident as well).

I remember as a kid going to the little pharmacy way down the street (the only store that carried paperbacks I could walk to) and wishing there were more fantasy / sci-fi books to read. Now I walk into a book store and get physically ill looking at all the books with the same damn covers (bimbo in skimpy outfit holding weapon) written by talentless hacks.

/be careful what you wish for... you may just get it.
//I did like some of Harry Potter so there are a few gems in there. But too much crap to sift through.
 
2012-03-26 02:07:10 PM

Some 'Splainin' To Do: I'm curious to know where your 99% confidence is coming from given that there was absolutely no indication of sarcasm in the original post.


I live with the man, so I can vouch that he was being a wiseass.
 
2012-03-26 02:08:07 PM

hitlersbrain: //I did like some of Harry Potter so there are a few gems in there. But too much crap to sift through.


So because you'd rather not "sift through the crap," you just assume everything is crap. Perfectly logical, that.
 
2012-03-26 02:08:55 PM

DamnYankees: Carth: This is the best Panem map I've seen. I'm sure there are some problems with it but it matches up pretty well with what the book says.

I've seen this map alot recently, and I have to say I think its awful. In the history of the world, there have never, every been provinces or country borders which were concentric circles or nautilus spires or anything like that. It's absurd and unrealistic.

/nerd-rage


Fences and borders. That map is indefensible What is the fence in the movie? I have not read the books. Another district? Map makes it look unoccupied.
 
2012-03-26 02:10:31 PM

Snort: Fences and borders. That map is indefensible What is the fence in the movie? I have not read the books. Another district? Map makes it look unoccupied.


I believe it's a mix of the two. Sometimes the Districts bump up against each other and sometimes it's wilderness.
 
2012-03-26 02:10:32 PM

Tawnos: You were probably one of those people who complained that Jackson cut Tom Bombadil from LOTR. Eesh.


From the 4-hour Director's Cut? Yes. Yes I did. Because he went through all that effort to make it a mate to the book and to please the nerds, only to drop the ball on four details: his reinterpretation of the Battle of Helm's Deep, the bizarre encounter between Aragorn and the ghost armies of the damned (river of skulls??), the omission of Tom Bombadil, and the curious inconsistency where certain Hobbits grew taller, yet were all the same height at the coronation. Oops. Oh well, at least they edited out the car driving in the distance of a cornfield for the DVD releases.

My problem with these inconsistencies is when someone claims to be making every effort to be faithful to the source material, and then all the little flaws keep popping up and aren't addressed. Or worse: introduced flaws.

Katniss went for her private evaluation before the Game Masters last; in the movie she was second-to-last. It's the little things that matter when you try so hard in one spot to be consistent, and then radically fail on so many others. Yes, it really does matter. Clearly you could not get half of what happened in that movie without having read the books, and yet for a movie that caters to the book-reading crowd, they did a fine job of muddling with the plot enough to annoy the readers in attendance. It's distracting. It's a slap in the face of the fans.

brigid_fitch: I think they did the best they could with 2 1/2 hours and trying to keep a PG-13 rating.


Then we will agree to disagree. That was a PG movie. There was nothing in that movie that couldn't be seen by a pre-teen with parental approval. Hell, I watched parents drag infants in to see "Silent Hill" and wanted to beat them out of the theater for what will surely be a lifetime of trauma to those children; there was absolutely nothing trauma-inducing about "Hunger Games".

brigid_fitch: Again, how does any of that affect this movie itself?


The movie was only really relevant and comprehensible if you had read the book first. See my other posts about how vile it is to cater to the book-reading crowd, and then spit on them at the same time.
 
2012-03-26 02:11:58 PM

Alpha Sierra Foxtrot: Snort: The tie ins to Rome were a bit over done. The author picked names out or a hat but brought none of the character. Cato, Cinna, Ceasar.... Just missing an Octavian/Augustus/

Her prep team is made up of Octavia, Flavius, and Venia.

Was probably the trend at some point.


I think more likely the author was making parallels to Rome.
 
Displayed 50 of 432 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report