Hunger Games

[nelsonmuntz]

This movie is terrible, but a lot of people seem to like it, so I have to ask, what is the appeal of this film? That we get to see Jennifer Lawrence run around in skin tight clothes and shoot arrows at things? Every plot turn was more farfetched that the previous one. The costumes were ridiculous. Every line of dialogue was a cliche, and the dystopian future didn't hold together by its own logic. On one hand, it is this primitive society, on another it has these absurd technology that borders on magic. Once you put magic into a story, it becomes kind of pointless to keep watching, because magic becomes the plot trump card.

I like science fiction too, and even like futuristic thrillers. I couldn't wait for this movie to be over.

 

[SubbaBub]

These movies require that you'd read the books. Much of the books revovle around the internal narrative and thoughts of Katniss. The movies broad brush the repetative physical actions of the characters and eliminate a number of interactions between characters that make you care about them and what happens to them. The first movie barely pulled enough of them to make sense, the second movie did not.

At the end of the day, they are difficult adaptations, especially if you are making a popcorn movie.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I can tolerate science fiction and fantasy as long as the use of magic or technology to significantly impact the plot is manageable. If the thing with the dogs had occurred halfway through the movie instead of near the end, i would have turned it off.

If you are going to create a dystopian future society, the internal logic of the society has to hold together. That is the brilliance of Farenheit 451 or 1984. Movies like Looper or Blade Runner also hold together the internal logic of their world. Nothing in Hunger Games makes sense. It seems to be a fascist, corporatist state, but yet there are individual sponsors. The class system is confusing.

I also have issues with the contrived nature of some of Katniss' reactions to events in the contest itself. On further review, the movie still sucks.

 

[SubbaBub]

I think it's important to remember this is a YA series. Think more Twilight than LOTR or even Harry Potter. It is certainly not social commentary at the level of 1984, Brave New World, or Animal Farm. Future generations will not likely be reading this stuff. But, I agree the movies are dissappointing, though the books do a little better in legitimizing the fictional world of Panem.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I get that it is YA fiction, but like Twilight, it still sucks. Harry Potter is in an entirely different category from those other two series.

 

[whaler11]

The Hunger Games books are pretty good.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

I don't see myself reading a lot of teen chick lit. I got about 3 pages into Twilight before I realized that the book would be immeasurably worse than the movie, which was already terrible.

I consider myself enlightened, but I struggle with some movies and literature directed to women. I thought Terms of Endearment and Delores Claibourne were both brilliant, both movie and book/story. Although, both were written by men. I liked most of Nora Ephron's movies.

I didn't like Dirty Dancing, Bridget Jones or Fat Greek Wedding, but I get the fantasy aspect of those movies. Snaring a partner completely out of the protagonist's league is a very common fantasy among men too.

I think the Notebook is terrible. With the Notebook, women see a tragic tale of a woman struggling with difficult choice between two men she loves (or more precisely, one she loves because he has a good body and one she likes because he has cash). Men see a movie about a gold digging, hysterical witch stringing two likable guys along because she is a manipulative, selfish and more than a little evil. I couldn't finish this movie, but don't worry about giving me spoilers, because I will never watch 2 seconds of it again.

Twilight is just grotesque, but i don't think anyone would argue.

Beaches wouldn't be so bad if the acting wasn't so awful.

 

[whaler11]

I don't see myself reading a lot of teen chick lit. I got about 3 pages into Twilight before I realized that the book would be immeasurably worse than the movie, which was already terrible.

I consider myself enlightened, but I struggle with some movies and literature directed to women. I thought Terms of Endearment and Delores Claibourne were both brilliant, both movie and book/story. Although, both were written by men. I liked most of Nora Ephron's movies.

I didn't like Dirty Dancing, Bridget Jones or Fat Greek Wedding, but I get the fantasy aspect of those movies. Snaring a partner completely out of the protagonist's league is a very common fantasy among men too.

I think the Notebook is terrible. With the Notebook, women see a tragic tale of a woman struggling with difficult choice between two men she loves (or more precisely, one she loves because he has a good body and one she likes because he has cash). Men see a movie about a gold digging, hysterical witch stringing two likable guys along because she is a manipulative, selfish and more than a little evil. I couldn't finish this movie, but don't worry about giving me spoilers, because I will never watch 2 seconds of it again.

Twilight is just grotesque, but i don't think anyone would argue.

Beaches wouldn't be so bad if the acting wasn't so awful.

I don't disagree with any of that but the books were pretty good. Well I have no idea what the notebook is even about but that sounds about right.

 

[BlueMAB]

The books were good. Not as good as Harry Potter, but good. The first movie was horrible. The second was an improvement.

Neither of them do the books justice. I think the producers/writers/directors are acting as if everyone who sees the movies has already read the books.

The new Hobbit movie looks great, the first one was just average.

 

[John]

The books were good. Not as good as Harry Potter, but good. The first movie was horrible. The second was an improvement.

Neither of them do the books justice. I think the producers/writers/directors are acting as if everyone who sees the movies has already read the books.

The new Hobbit movie looks great, the first one was just average.

I'll pay to see it, but I cannot reconcile why Legolas is in a Hobbit movie.

 

[ZooCougar]

I saw the first Hunger Games movie. I will wait for the second one to come out on PPV or something.

 

[meyers7]

I saw the first Hunger Games movie. I will wait for the second one to come out on PPV or something.

Wait for TNT/TBS/USA.

 

[BlueMAB]

I saw the first Hunger Games movie. I will wait for the second one to come out on PPV or something.

The second movie is much better than the first.

If you're going to wait anyway, read the books.

 

[ZooCougar]

The second movie is much better than the first.

If you're going to wait anyway, read the books.

I am totally shocked that you like this stuff. Not judging. I like hard science fiction, I am a reading mofo. This seems too light to me.

 

[progrocks]

The third Hunger Games book is horrid, and they are going to make 2 movies out of it!

Not all YA sucks. Harry potter was good, His Dark Materials ranged from amazing to disappointing, though not anywhere near the third book disappointment level of hunger Games. Shame they wasted the Golden Compass movie, though how are you supposed to make a movie in America where the character is literally trying to kill god?

 

[coachRD]

The books were good. Not as good as Harry Potter, but good. The first movie was horrible. The second was an improvement.

Neither of them do the books justice. I think the producers/writers/directors are acting as if everyone who sees the movies has already read the books.

The new Hobbit movie looks great, the first one was just average.

The new Hobbit movie is beautiful, and definitely on a MUCH more grand scale than the 1st one. Smaug is phenomenal and a huge part of the film. If you are the type of fan that will be bothered by the fact that they did not follow the Hobbit book, you will be annoyed however. I LOVED the 2nd Hobbit movie. I loved the LOTR and Hobbit books, and I'm not the type of fan who needs a movie to be fully in-line with the book that inspired it. They certainly stick to the overall storyline, but they add in some things that Tolkien wrote about in the LOTR appendices, and they just flat-out added some things to the movie to Hollywood-ize it (notably: Legolas plays a huge role in the dwarves escape from the wood elves in the "Barrels out of bond" chapter...). For me-I had no problem with it-it just resulted in a fun, action-packed sequence that looked awesome on the big screen!

 

[BlueMAB]

I think I read some of the Hobbit in grade school, and it was likely the children's version if such things exist, so basically I don't remember anything about LOTR or the Hobbit, so whatever they do in the movies to make them more entertaining is fine with me. I can't wait to see the movie.

 

[coachRD]

I think I read some of the Hobbit in grade school, and it was likely the children's version if such things exist, so basically I don't remember anything about LOTR or the Hobbit, so whatever they do in the movies to make them more entertaining is fine with me. I can't wait to see the movie.

If you have no book-related expectations, I think you are going to LOVE it if you go for this genre. FYI, the Hobbit was written as more of a light-hearted childrens' adventure/fantasy story, whereas LOTR was written to be a bit more intense and dark. Tolkien actually did some edits to the Hobbit book to make it more in-line with LOTR in terms of the importance/role of the ring-once LOTR took on a life of its own he had to link the two stories a bit. Smaug is awesome in the movie!

Enjoy.

 

[BlueMAB]

I am totally shocked that you like this stuff. Not judging. I like hard science fiction, I am a reading mofo. This seems too light to me.

I like to read, but I like page turners. I'm currently in school and do enough reading that anything I do on the side I want it to be light and enjoyable.

I also like to read autobiographies. I loved Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged