The Hunger Games

[koshergrl]

It hasn't had the same amount of hype as Avatar (which was a huge disappointment to me as well).

It's a good story.

You aren't missing anything if you choose to watch it on a small screen.

 

[mudwhistle]

I've decided I'm not going to see it right now. Too much hype like Avatar and others. I ended up being disappointed after all the BS.

Avatar was pretty good.....except for the evil militaristic establishment angle.

 

[koshergrl]

I tried several times, never made it all the way through Avatar. I found the story asinine.

 

[Gem]

As a teacher, I can tell you I haven't seen a novel that has been as well received by so many young people as Hunger Games - and I'm including the Harry Potter series.

Collins managed to create a series that not only captured the attention of all the young adults who liked Harry Potter...but she grabbed the attention of the kids who though the Harry books sucked.

I used Hunger Games this fall as part of my 9th-12th grade Learning Support English class. I didn't have a single student who didn't enjoy it, which is un-freakin'-beliveable considering the unmotivated readers I work with everyday.

Its a great read. I'd recommend it to anyone.

 

[koshergrl]

As a teacher, I can tell you I haven't seen a novel that has been as well received by so many young people as Hunger Games - and I'm including the Harry Potter series.

Collins managed to create a series that not only captured the attention of all the young adults who liked Harry Potter...but she grabbed the attention of the kids who though the Harry books sucked.

I used Hunger Games this fall as part of my 9th-12th grade Learning Support English class. I didn't have a single student who didn't enjoy it, which is un-freakin'-beliveable considering the unmotivated readers I work with everyday.

Its a great read. I'd recommend it to anyone.

It's written at a little higher level than Harry Potter (especially the first books, which seemed to be targeting a younger audience, the age of HP character in the books). And it incorporates things that all kids can appreciate..no over the top fantasy/magic....things like relationships with parents, each other, siblings, the opposite sex. Plus it has stuff about hunting!

 

[strollingbones]

well i got the book dropped off to me..read about 30 pages and quit.....i am on the 3rd book of game of thrones.....i am not stopping to read this tween stuff...and i am not going to the movies monday...its 2 hours and 22 minutes....i have 0 desire to sit that long

 

[Sarah G]

I've decided I'm not going to see it right now. Too much hype like Avatar and others. I ended up being disappointed after all the BS.

Avatar was pretty good.....except for the evil militaristic establishment angle.

Yeah, it was good. The hype turned me off though and it took awhile for me to finally sit down and watch.

 

[Gem]

It's written at a little higher level than Harry Potter (especially the first books, which seemed to be targeting a younger audience, the age of HP character in the books). And it incorporates things that all kids can appreciate..no over the top fantasy/magic....things like relationships with parents, each other, siblings, the opposite sex. Plus it has stuff about hunting!

I agree completely. I just use Harry Potter for comparison because I think a lot of people go to that series when they think of the most successful example of young adult fiction. And, even though Harry Potter was incredibly popular with young people - there were a lot of young people who didn't enjoy it. I have found that a lot of my students - those with learning and emotional disabilities and the middle and high school level - much preferred this series to the Harry Potter series.

I thought both were excellent.

 

[KevinWestern]

It's written at a little higher level than Harry Potter (especially the first books, which seemed to be targeting a younger audience, the age of HP character in the books). And it incorporates things that all kids can appreciate..no over the top fantasy/magic....things like relationships with parents, each other, siblings, the opposite sex. Plus it has stuff about hunting!

I agree... the concept of the Hunger Games is a heavier one, and geared at older kids.

However, I think J.K. Rowling is a better writer of the two (personally).

 

[Montrovant]

A friend of mine saw the movie last night. He hadn't read the books and said he felt the movie left too much out; he found himself asking questions about the books of his cousin during the movie, because he said some of what they left unexplained was important to the plot.

how did he know stuff was left out if he had not read the books?

By left out, I mean he said parts of the movie needed more explanation. He told me he asked about the books at certain points because parts of the movie didn't make sense or didn't seem to have a point.

 

[hipeter924]

I've decided I'm not going to see it right now. Too much hype like Avatar and others. I ended up being disappointed after all the BS.

Avatar was pretty good.....except for the evil militaristic establishment angle.

I never watched it at the movies, Alice in Wonderland, and rest of them were better. I only saw Avatar once because there was nothing else on TV.

 

[Darkwind]

I tried several times, never made it all the way through Avatar. I found the story asinine.

That's interesting. Of course, when I saw it, I wasn't expecting any grand kind of fantasy movie on the order of Star Wars. I knew right from the beginning it was a love story.

Still, I enjoyed it a great deal and some of the cgi was pretty good.

I have not seen, nor read "The Hunger Games". Not sure if I'll have time. I may watch it when it comes out on DVD.

 

[Cecilie1200]

I have not read the books, mostly because I think they are 'young adult' books. The couple of times I have tried books with that label, written for a younger audience, I was very unimpressed.

I'm sure I'll watch the movie at some point, although I doubt I'll see it in the theater. If I like it, maybe I'll try the books out.

I must say that I find it sad that, by and large, books written for adolescents in their mid-teens are now the cutting edge of literature for grown adults in this country.

That being said, the books are workmanlike and readable, nothing brilliant or sparkling, but passable and certainly good for the age group they were originally aimed at. This was probably actually a benefit when it came time to adapt them to a movie, because they really didn't have enough depth and complication to require much editing to fit them into the film format. And they were quite visual in their presentation, which meant they moved to film quite well. I've always said that one of the reasons that Stephen King novels so seldom make good movies is because their brilliance lies in the exposition, which is tough to translate into something visual.

 

[Cecilie1200]

A friend of mine saw the movie last night. He hadn't read the books and said he felt the movie left too much out; he found himself asking questions about the books of his cousin during the movie, because he said some of what they left unexplained was important to the plot.

how did he know stuff was left out if he had not read the books?

By left out, I mean he said parts of the movie needed more explanation. He told me he asked about the books at certain points because parts of the movie didn't make sense or didn't seem to have a point.

I saw the movie with my husband, who hasn't read the books at all, and my best friend, Blair, who is in the process of listening to the first book on audiotape. Blair has only gotten halfway through it, but that was more than enough for him to be able to follow the concepts of the movie, such as the rules of the game, the backstory, etc. My husband really only needed to ask me one question - "What's with the parachutes?" - because they didn't really explain about sponsors in quite the depth they needed to. Everything else, he easily got from context and logic (and extensive experience as a gaming and sci-fi geek).

 

[Montrovant]

how did he know stuff was left out if he had not read the books?

By left out, I mean he said parts of the movie needed more explanation. He told me he asked about the books at certain points because parts of the movie didn't make sense or didn't seem to have a point.

I saw the movie with my husband, who hasn't read the books at all, and my best friend, Blair, who is in the process of listening to the first book on audiotape. Blair has only gotten halfway through it, but that was more than enough for him to be able to follow the concepts of the movie, such as the rules of the game, the backstory, etc. My husband really only needed to ask me one question - "What's with the parachutes?" - because they didn't really explain about sponsors in quite the depth they needed to. Everything else, he easily got from context and logic (and extensive experience as a gaming and sci-fi geek).

The only specific gripe I remember him saying was that the districts were very poorly described. Why is everything divided that way, why the number that exist, why do the people in one of the districts all dress so oddly, things like that. Like I said, I haven't seen it yet, so I don't know how important any of that may have been or if he's getting annoyed at unimportant aspects of the movie. I have been guilty of that plenty of times myself.

 

[Cecilie1200]

By left out, I mean he said parts of the movie needed more explanation. He told me he asked about the books at certain points because parts of the movie didn't make sense or didn't seem to have a point.

I saw the movie with my husband, who hasn't read the books at all, and my best friend, Blair, who is in the process of listening to the first book on audiotape. Blair has only gotten halfway through it, but that was more than enough for him to be able to follow the concepts of the movie, such as the rules of the game, the backstory, etc. My husband really only needed to ask me one question - "What's with the parachutes?" - because they didn't really explain about sponsors in quite the depth they needed to. Everything else, he easily got from context and logic (and extensive experience as a gaming and sci-fi geek).

The only specific gripe I remember him saying was that the districts were very poorly described. Why is everything divided that way, why the number that exist, why do the people in one of the districts all dress so oddly, things like that. Like I said, I haven't seen it yet, so I don't know how important any of that may have been or if he's getting annoyed at unimportant aspects of the movie. I have been guilty of that plenty of times myself.

Well, the books were fairly clear that District 12 was West Virginia coal-mining country, more or less. I didn't realize until I looked on the Internet that the Capitol is apparently in the Rocky Mountains somewhere.

I suppose they could have explained a bit better WHY there are districts and how the system works, but on the other hand, the first book didn't really explain it all that well, either. The more in-depth info trickled out, particularly in Book 2.

 

[Conservative]

By left out, I mean he said parts of the movie needed more explanation. He told me he asked about the books at certain points because parts of the movie didn't make sense or didn't seem to have a point.

I saw the movie with my husband, who hasn't read the books at all, and my best friend, Blair, who is in the process of listening to the first book on audiotape. Blair has only gotten halfway through it, but that was more than enough for him to be able to follow the concepts of the movie, such as the rules of the game, the backstory, etc. My husband really only needed to ask me one question - "What's with the parachutes?" - because they didn't really explain about sponsors in quite the depth they needed to. Everything else, he easily got from context and logic (and extensive experience as a gaming and sci-fi geek).

The only specific gripe I remember him saying was that the districts were very poorly described. Why is everything divided that way, why the number that exist, why do the people in one of the districts all dress so oddly, things like that. Like I said, I haven't seen it yet, so I don't know how important any of that may have been or if he's getting annoyed at unimportant aspects of the movie. I have been guilty of that plenty of times myself.

if they bogged down the movie with a complete description of each district, what they all did, why they were arranged that way, and so on, it would have made the movie about twice as long, and bored the snot out of the target audience.

 

[MikeK]

If it isn't spectacular on the special effects end, well, the story is good enough to carry it anyway.

I read an article in an archery magazine by a former Olympian (Randy Uhlmer) who was hired to coach the lead actress in The Hunger Game who had never shot a bow. He said all he was able to do in the allotted time was to develop her form and bring her up to basic shooting skills. But the mostly impossible shots she makes in the movie are all enhanced.

 

[koshergrl]

Oh I've no doubt. I think they used a body double a couple of times too.

But those aren't the sort of *special effects* I'm talking about. I wish they had shown the bodies being picked up by the hover craft, for example. I wish they'd given an aerial view of the dome thingy. Big effects that look cool on a big screen.

But it was a good movie anyway. I went with my dol, we enjoyed it.

 

[Conservative]

If it isn't spectacular on the special effects end, well, the story is good enough to carry it anyway.

I read an article in an archery magazine by a former Olympian (Randy Uhlmer) who was hired to coach the lead actress in The Hunger Game who had never shot a bow. He said all he was able to do in the allotted time was to develop her form and bring her up to basic shooting skills. But the mostly impossible shots she makes in the movie are all enhanced.

and the fact that the lead actress can't shoot a bow to save her life, in real life, makes it a bad movie?