Don't like the snow? You can make a bookmark with the following text instead of a url: javascript:snowStorm.toggleSnow(). Clicking it will toggle the snow on and off.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

The Hunger Games: Your imagination is racist and you should feel bad

1131416181921

Posts

  • hanskeyhanskey Registered User
    edited March 2012
    see317 wrote: »
    hanskey wrote: »
    mcdermott wrote: »
    If people started disappearing off into the woods the Capitol would notice. Katniss can do it because she comes back. Don't know about the movie but iirc in the book they take attendance for the Reaping, and for other mandatory assemblies.

    They know who lived in the districts, and presumably any groups that wandered off would be hunted down, get their district punished, or most likely both.
    Spoiler:
    .
    Spoiler:
    good call

    hanskey on
  • DelzhandDelzhand motivated battle programmerRegistered User regular
    Saw the movie this afternoon. Among other things, I don't understand why Seneca seemed
    Spoiler:

    Also why did the camera go to utter shit as soon as they appeared.

    jk0Btsj.png
  • dojangodojango Registered User

    Does the Capitol have enough wherewithal to control the entire country from one modestly-size city?

    And why is the Capitol so intent on spending what looks like literally ALL of their money on pissing on the Districts? Seems like an awful lot of trouble.

    They spend all their resources "pissing" on the districts (or keeping them in line, if you prefer) so that they can get resources from the districts to support their lavish lifestyle. Although maybe not clearly spelled out in the movie, it should be apparent that the Capitol is mostly an upperclass society that uses its superior tech to subjucate the districts to keep them providing resources.

  • AtomikaAtomika Merry Christmas your arse I pray God it's our lastRegistered User regular
    dojango wrote: »
    They spend all their resources "pissing" on the districts (or keeping them in line, if you prefer) so that they can get resources from the districts . . .

    Let's think about this line of reasoning.

  • AtomikaAtomika Merry Christmas your arse I pray God it's our lastRegistered User regular
    Delzhand wrote: »
    Jesus, what is even the point of trying, then?

    That was another problem I had with the actual Games. If the situation can constantly be manipulated by outside forces (including the people who are in charge of the Games), why would anyone care about the games or do things like bet money?

    If the line on Cowboys/Giants was Giants by 3 but there was the possibility that Jerry Jones might suddenly shoot fireballs at Eli Manning, not only am I not putting money down, I'm not giving a fuck about the outcome of the game.

    Who would give two shits about this stupid game?

  • enlightenedbumenlightenedbum Registered User regular
    Delzhand wrote: »
    Jesus, what is even the point of trying, then?

    That was another problem I had with the actual Games. If the situation can constantly be manipulated by outside forces (including the people who are in charge of the Games), why would anyone care about the games or do things like bet money?

    If the line on Cowboys/Giants was Giants by 3 but there was the possibility that Jerry Jones might suddenly shoot fireballs at Eli Manning, not only am I not putting money down, I'm not giving a fuck about the outcome of the game.

    Who would give two shits about this stupid game?

    Because you'll get fed if your tribute wins.

    Lose: to suffer defeat, to misplace (Ex: "I hope I don't lose the match." "Did you lose your phone again?")
    Loose: about to slip, to release (Ex: "That knot is loose." "Loose arrows.")
  • CowSharkCowShark Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    The people running the games do interfere--but they don't usually interfere in order to kill contestants. Usually it's a matter of trying to hurry them into action, like the "We're having a party at the cornucopia. Everybody has a present there that they need." When Katniss is heading for the boundary, they shoot fireballs at her to turn her around, not to kill her expressly.

    And how does a dude get the impression they're using all their resources for pissing? They have hunger games every year--ostensibly it's a sustainable venture (74 years and still going), so they're not pissing away anything they can't afford to.

    CowShark on
    3DS Friend Code: 4398-9974-9558
  • CanadianWolverineCanadianWolverine Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    How could there be no people outside the districts? That doesn't make any sense

    There should be people left in just about every country, and some (like canada) would have vast habitable areas. I wonder if it's supposed to be like 1984 where the inhabitants of this world are completely isolated from the outside, and there really are other countries out there that they have no knowledge of.

    Actually, the books do cover this in some regards. The setting really does have a lot in common with something like Fallout because part of the reason there are so few people willing to go outside the fence is because (Edit: book 1, 2, 3 and movie spoilers, SPOILERS like they are going out of style ... and computer games)
    Spoiler:
    That's why they don't think taking off into the wilderness is such a hot idea, other than super tech having the high ground on you and tracking you if you do run and not having the skills to survive the wilderness. Oh right, another thing the movie changes, glosses over, and fucks up on - ugh, what a PoS, its a mockery of the books.

    And you know why I think Atomic Ross is having such a disconnect from the rest of us who read the books first? Because the movie is utter shit on so many of these topics the books explicitly covers and is shit in many other ways, not the least of which making the places and people of the Districts, especially her district, sexy (nutrition) and romantic instead of the fucking ghetto land described in the books. Even if you have only read the first book, you are not going to have the full story because of how much of the information Katniss has in the first book is straight up Capital propaganda she learned in "school".

    CanadianWolverine on
    steam_sig.png
  • AtomikaAtomika Merry Christmas your arse I pray God it's our lastRegistered User regular
    And you know why I think Atomic Ross is having such a disconnect from the rest of us who read the books first? Because the movie is utter shit on so many of these topics the books explicitly covers and is shit in many other ways, not the least of which making the places and people of the Districts, especially her district, sexy (nutrition) and romantic instead of the fucking ghetto land described in the books. Even if you have only read the first book, you are not going to have the full story because of how much of the information Katniss has in the first book is straight up Capital propaganda she learned in "school".

    That's actually a big part of it. I don't feel empathy for most of these characters because even the ones that are supposed to be the worst off of all (Katniss and Peeta) still live better than many free Americans do in places like West Virginia and Pennsylvania. Everyone is handsome and pretty, and no real suffering is seen.

  • TaramoorTaramoor Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    And you know why I think Atomic Ross is having such a disconnect from the rest of us who read the books first? Because the movie is utter shit on so many of these topics the books explicitly covers and is shit in many other ways, not the least of which making the places and people of the Districts, especially her district, sexy (nutrition) and romantic instead of the fucking ghetto land described in the books. Even if you have only read the first book, you are not going to have the full story because of how much of the information Katniss has in the first book is straight up Capital propaganda she learned in "school".

    That's actually a big part of it. I don't feel empathy for most of these characters because even the ones that are supposed to be the worst off of all (Katniss and Peeta) still live better than many free Americans do in places like West Virginia and Pennsylvania. Everyone is handsome and pretty, and no real suffering is seen.

    I think I see what your primary issue is and I also feel it is a primary failing of the movie as compared to the book.

    There is no Hunger in The Hunger Games.

    In the books people die of starvation in with astonishing regularity, it's just an accepted thing that you might fall asleep hungry and not wake up. The movie absolutely did not get this point across and it seems to be what is most of the criticism is hinging on. It difficult to accept the entire notion of the oppression because the movie didn't sell it very well. I simply took it as rote that they were desperate for food because I knew, from the book, that they were.

    Taramoor on
  • AtomikaAtomika Merry Christmas your arse I pray God it's our lastRegistered User regular
    Taramoor wrote: »
    And you know why I think Atomic Ross is having such a disconnect from the rest of us who read the books first? Because the movie is utter shit on so many of these topics the books explicitly covers and is shit in many other ways, not the least of which making the places and people of the Districts, especially her district, sexy (nutrition) and romantic instead of the fucking ghetto land described in the books. Even if you have only read the first book, you are not going to have the full story because of how much of the information Katniss has in the first book is straight up Capital propaganda she learned in "school".

    That's actually a big part of it. I don't feel empathy for most of these characters because even the ones that are supposed to be the worst off of all (Katniss and Peeta) still live better than many free Americans do in places like West Virginia and Pennsylvania. Everyone is handsome and pretty, and no real suffering is seen.

    I think I see what your primary issue is and I also feel it is a primary failing of the movie as compared to the book.

    There is no Hunger in The Hunger Games.

    In the books people die of starvation in with astonishing regularity, it's just an accepted thing that you might fall asleep hungry and not wake up. The movie absolutely did not get this point across and it seems to be what is most of the criticism is hinging on. It difficult to accept the entire notion of the oppression because the movie didn't sell it very well. I simply took it as rote that they were desperate for food because I knew, from the book, that they were.

    The movie pulled a lot of punches. Especially considering how much a PG-13 rating will let a movie get away with, it was an awfully sanitized and soft version of dystopia. It pulled literally every punch it could.

  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    Yup, starvation was definitely a real thing in the book. Katniss talks about seeing people in the districts basically sit down and die on a not too infrequent basis.

    She almost starved to death as well, because she was too young to put more entries into the games.


    Also, might want to ensure book two and three spoilers are also labeled as such. Somebody who's only seen or read the first might think they're safe.

  • CanadianWolverineCanadianWolverine Registered User regular
    mcdermott wrote: »
    Yup, starvation was definitely a real thing in the book. Katniss talks about seeing people in the districts basically sit down and die on a not too infrequent basis.

    She almost starved to death as well, because she was too young to put more entries into the games.


    Also, might want to ensure book two and three spoilers are also labeled as such. Somebody who's only seen or read the first might think they're safe.

    Oh man, I am the worst for that, thanks for the reminder. I just don't even think about it, I want to discuss it ALL. Went back and edited for a label thingy.

    steam_sig.png
  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    No big, I'd already chosen to click a clearly labeled spoiler because I am weak.

  • ZombiemamboZombiemambo Registered User regular
    And you know why I think Atomic Ross is having such a disconnect from the rest of us who read the books first? Because the movie is utter shit on so many of these topics the books explicitly covers and is shit in many other ways, not the least of which making the places and people of the Districts, especially her district, sexy (nutrition) and romantic instead of the fucking ghetto land described in the books. Even if you have only read the first book, you are not going to have the full story because of how much of the information Katniss has in the first book is straight up Capital propaganda she learned in "school".

    That's actually a big part of it. I don't feel empathy for most of these characters because even the ones that are supposed to be the worst off of all (Katniss and Peeta) still live better than many free Americans do in places like West Virginia and Pennsylvania. Everyone is handsome and pretty, and no real suffering is seen.

    When I saw District 12 in the movie it was gorgeous. My vision of it in the book was a concrete wasteland with shitty, decaying structures that often didn't even have windows. It was ugly and desolate and the only way anybody could eat was because people went into the wilderness to find food. They skip over it in the movie, but the District 12 market is full of wild game. Even the Peacekeepers buy it, IIRC.

    JKKaAGp.png
  • kimekime Queen of Blades Registered User regular
    mcdermott wrote: »
    Also, might want to ensure book two and three spoilers are also labeled as such. Somebody who's only seen or read the first might think they're safe.

    Oh man, I am the worst for that, thanks for the reminder. I just don't even think about it, I want to discuss it ALL. Went back and edited for a label thingy.

    There was one of those last page, unlabeled. *sigh*, I hate spoilers

    3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
    Stream - Offline
    Battle.net ID: kime#1822
  • Casually HardcoreCasually Hardcore Registered User regular
    Well Peta and Katniss are a bit special for

    A) Katniss hunts and is able to trade, something that's very risky to do.

    and

    B) Peta lives at a Bakery at the 'rich' part of town. Needless to say, he eats.

    steam_sig.png
  • override367override367 misogynist/MRA/socially irresponsible Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    Keeping people so hungry that they can fall asleep and not wake up isn't good at having an orderly society (or anywhere you rely on efficient manual labor), I'm not sure any laws against hunting would be sufficient. You'd have to devote a ton of resources to catching and executing runaways for essentially no reason

    override367 on
    XBLIVE: Biggestoverride
    League of Legends: override367
  • enc0reenc0re Registered User regular
    Yeah, it's a bit nonsense that in the books the population is kept hungry to stave off rebellion. Reality tends to work the exact other way around. It's called bread and circuses for a reason.

  • dojangodojango Registered User
    dojango wrote: »
    They spend all their resources "pissing" on the districts (or keeping them in line, if you prefer) so that they can get resources from the districts . . .

    Let's think about this line of reasoning.

    um, ok. they get resources from the districts and then use those resources to construct a society ehere they live like kings by keeping the districts subjucated. it's a pretty standard concept. if you want to start discussing the amount of resources it would require, and what the breakdown between security/luxuries/tech is, well, that's not entirely relevant to the plot. If you accept that it can be done in, say, game of thrones or pre-1789 france, why is it so difficult to accept that it can be done in future world?

  • AtomikaAtomika Merry Christmas your arse I pray God it's our lastRegistered User regular
    dojango wrote: »
    dojango wrote: »
    They spend all their resources "pissing" on the districts (or keeping them in line, if you prefer) so that they can get resources from the districts . . .

    Let's think about this line of reasoning.

    um, ok. they get resources from the districts and then use those resources to construct a society ehere they live like kings by keeping the districts subjucated. it's a pretty standard concept. if you want to start discussing the amount of resources it would require, and what the breakdown between security/luxuries/tech is, well, that's not entirely relevant to the plot. If you accept that it can be done in, say, game of thrones or pre-1789 france, why is it so difficult to accept that it can be done in future world?

    First of all, I don't read Game of Thrones, so I accept nothing.

    Second, while the economic relationship between the Capitol and the Districts may not be critical to the plot about "Katniss and Peeta in the Hunger Games," if the conceit the plot is based upon can't stand up to scrutiny then I can't hardly be asked to suspend my disbelief.

  • AtomikaAtomika Merry Christmas your arse I pray God it's our lastRegistered User regular
    enc0re wrote: »
    Yeah, it's a bit nonsense that in the books the population is kept hungry to stave off rebellion. Reality tends to work the exact other way around. It's called bread and circuses for a reason.

    In Panem, it's more like "Bread to remind you we will kill you in the Circuses."

  • Boring7Boring7 Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    dojango wrote: »
    dojango wrote: »
    They spend all their resources "pissing" on the districts (or keeping them in line, if you prefer) so that they can get resources from the districts . . .

    Let's think about this line of reasoning.

    um, ok. they get resources from the districts and then use those resources to construct a society ehere they live like kings by keeping the districts subjucated. it's a pretty standard concept. if you want to start discussing the amount of resources it would require, and what the breakdown between security/luxuries/tech is, well, that's not entirely relevant to the plot. If you accept that it can be done in, say, game of thrones or pre-1789 france, why is it so difficult to accept that it can be done in future world?

    Hell, it happens right now in North Korea. Of course NK also has that cultish state pseudo-religion, and they called it "divine right of kings" for a reason, back in the day. Of course there isn't such an awed, semi-religious faith in the powers that be, just a hate for 'em.

    Hunger games has some weaknesses if you over-analyze it. People don't live in misery without having some sort of cognitive dissonance. Even the peasants of the worst feudal states truly believed that their lord was preferable to being raped and pillaged and enslaved (man, slavery is another thing that history tries to sweep under the rug) by whatever foreigners and/or neighbors happened to be in raiding distance.

    Which is another point, slavery or (insert favorite euphemism here) aren't popping up on my cursory Hunger Games search, even though you have no human-intelligence robots and a culture of decadent self-indulgence by the ruling class. It's hard to find a culture that doesn't have it's tip-top overlords enjoying the thrill and power of ordering people to serve and service you in your own home. This segues neatly into the fact that a 16 year old girl who had to provide for her family for several years has "sold herself," been sexually assaulted, or at the very least known someone in such a situation by age 16 (or whatever age she is) and we're just kind of hopping past these dark realities of human nature.

    Which I have to say, I'm okay with. That stuff is a little too depressing. And while the political situation may have some credulity issues, so did Star Wars. The Emperor and the Empire ruled by FEAR and blew up planets just to make a point. We let it slide because the point of the story was, "evil empire, good rebellion, woo revolution!" And that was fun.

    Boring7 on
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Goldman Sachs may as well be named COBRA.
  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    Boring7 wrote: »
    dojango wrote: »
    dojango wrote: »
    They spend all their resources "pissing" on the districts (or keeping them in line, if you prefer) so that they can get resources from the districts . . .

    Let's think about this line of reasoning.

    um, ok. they get resources from the districts and then use those resources to construct a society ehere they live like kings by keeping the districts subjucated. it's a pretty standard concept. if you want to start discussing the amount of resources it would require, and what the breakdown between security/luxuries/tech is, well, that's not entirely relevant to the plot. If you accept that it can be done in, say, game of thrones or pre-1789 france, why is it so difficult to accept that it can be done in future world?

    Hell, it happens right now in North Korea. Of course NK also has that cultish state pseudo-religion, and they called it "divine right of kings" for a reason, back in the day. Of course there isn't such an awed, semi-religious faith in the powers that be, just a hate for 'em.

    Hunger games has some weaknesses if you over-analyze it. People don't live in misery without having some sort of cognitive dissonance. Even the peasants of the worst feudal states truly believed that their lord was preferable to being raped and pillaged and enslaved (man, slavery is another thing that history tries to sweep under the rug) by whatever foreigners and/or neighbors happened to be in raiding distance.

    Which is another point, slavery or (insert favorite euphemism here) aren't popping up on my cursory Hunger Games search, even though you have no human-intelligence robots and a culture of decadent self-indulgence by the ruling class. It's hard to find a culture that doesn't have it's tip-top overlords enjoying the thrill and power of ordering people to serve and service you in your own home. This segues neatly into the fact that a 16 year old girl who had to provide for her family for several years has "sold herself," been sexually assaulted, or at the very least known someone in such a situation by age 16 (or whatever age she is) and we're just kind of hopping past these dark realities of human nature.

    Which I have to say, I'm okay with. That stuff is a little too depressing. And while the political situation may have some credulity issues, so did Star Wars. The Emperor and the Empire ruled by FEAR and blew up planets just to make a point. We let it slide because the point of the story was, "evil empire, good rebellion, woo revolution!" And that was fun.

    Avoxes seem like they're basically slaves. No idea on later books, but I'm guessing they aren't limited to serving tributes.

  • dojangodojango Registered User
    mcdermott wrote: »
    Boring7 wrote: »
    dojango wrote: »
    dojango wrote: »
    They spend all their resources "pissing" on the districts (or keeping them in line, if you prefer) so that they can get resources from the districts . . .

    Let's think about this line of reasoning.

    um, ok. they get resources from the districts and then use those resources to construct a society ehere they live like kings by keeping the districts subjucated. it's a pretty standard concept. if you want to start discussing the amount of resources it would require, and what the breakdown between security/luxuries/tech is, well, that's not entirely relevant to the plot. If you accept that it can be done in, say, game of thrones or pre-1789 france, why is it so difficult to accept that it can be done in future world?

    Hell, it happens right now in North Korea. Of course NK also has that cultish state pseudo-religion, and they called it "divine right of kings" for a reason, back in the day. Of course there isn't such an awed, semi-religious faith in the powers that be, just a hate for 'em.

    Hunger games has some weaknesses if you over-analyze it. People don't live in misery without having some sort of cognitive dissonance. Even the peasants of the worst feudal states truly believed that their lord was preferable to being raped and pillaged and enslaved (man, slavery is another thing that history tries to sweep under the rug) by whatever foreigners and/or neighbors happened to be in raiding distance.

    Which is another point, slavery or (insert favorite euphemism here) aren't popping up on my cursory Hunger Games search, even though you have no human-intelligence robots and a culture of decadent self-indulgence by the ruling class. It's hard to find a culture that doesn't have it's tip-top overlords enjoying the thrill and power of ordering people to serve and service you in your own home. This segues neatly into the fact that a 16 year old girl who had to provide for her family for several years has "sold herself," been sexually assaulted, or at the very least known someone in such a situation by age 16 (or whatever age she is) and we're just kind of hopping past these dark realities of human nature.

    Which I have to say, I'm okay with. That stuff is a little too depressing. And while the political situation may have some credulity issues, so did Star Wars. The Emperor and the Empire ruled by FEAR and blew up planets just to make a point. We let it slide because the point of the story was, "evil empire, good rebellion, woo revolution!" And that was fun.

    Avoxes seem like they're basically slaves. No idea on later books, but I'm guessing they aren't limited to serving tributes.

    Oh yeah, forgot about those dudes. movie didn't mention them, they just were redshirts in the background.

  • PailryderPailryder Registered User regular
    i'm trying to see if the concept of a communist russia fits with the concept of the districts (protecterates) and the capitol (moscow). i mean, look at how horrible the conditions in the eastern block countries were/are and it doesn't seem a far leap. I don't get how people think the concept doesn't make sense.
    Spoiler:

    note i'm not defending the book/movie i'm just trying to say that i don't think it's a stretch to believe the circumstances.

    steam_sig.png
    3DS Friend Code: 0705-3757-3938
  • mcdermottmcdermott Registered User regular
    Pailryder wrote: »
    i'm trying to see if the concept of a communist russia fits with the concept of the districts (protecterates) and the capitol (moscow). i mean, look at how horrible the conditions in the eastern block countries were/are and it doesn't seem a far leap. I don't get how people think the concept doesn't make sense.
    Spoiler:

    note i'm not defending the book/movie i'm just trying to say that i don't think it's a stretch to believe the circumstances.

    That's true. 74 years isn't all that long.

  • Gandalf_the_CrazedGandalf_the_Crazed Vigilo ConfidoRegistered User regular
    Yeah. Bear in mind, also, that if any of the districts do rebel, they have no way of knowing that the others will join them. So they rebel, the Capitol cuts off all shipments to them, and their choices are:

    1) Submit, and accept their INCREASED punishment ("Executions for the ringleaders, and 4 Hunger Games tributes every year. Suck it up.")
    2) Become self-sufficient, without venturing out into the monstrosity-ridden wilderness in mass and dying to Tracker Jackers or similar horrors
    3) Make do for the time being, and hope that the Capitol doesn't have enough stockpiled resources to just wait them out. This would be made a little easier if the other districts would join your rebellion, but how do they know about it?

    None of those options really sound great, or persuasive enough to rip people out of their learned helplessness.

    PEUsig_zps56da03ec.jpg
  • MalkorMalkor Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    Having the Capital's games used as the catalyst for a rebellious symbol makes it more 'believable' in a way. Other than the fact that everyone knows who Katniss is and other YA conventions, she might as well be Spartacus.
    Spoiler:

    Malkor on
    14271f3c-c765-4e74-92b1-49d7612675f2.jpg
  • SniperGuySniperGuy Also known as Dohaeris Registered User, ClubPA regular
    mcdermott wrote: »
    Pailryder wrote: »
    i'm trying to see if the concept of a communist russia fits with the concept of the districts (protecterates) and the capitol (moscow). i mean, look at how horrible the conditions in the eastern block countries were/are and it doesn't seem a far leap. I don't get how people think the concept doesn't make sense.
    Spoiler:

    note i'm not defending the book/movie i'm just trying to say that i don't think it's a stretch to believe the circumstances.

    That's true. 74 years isn't all that long.

    It's definitely long enough to beat submission into plenty of people though. However in the books (massive book spoilers)
    Spoiler:

    3DS: 2509-1593-4994
    Steam Profile
    PSN ID: Dohaeris210
    Treadmill Desk Twitch Stream : status.php?streamuser=SniperGuy210
  • southwicksouthwick Registered User regular

    When I saw District 12 in the movie it was gorgeous. My vision of it in the book was a concrete wasteland with shitty, decaying structures that often didn't even have windows. It was ugly and desolate and the only way anybody could eat was because people went into the wilderness to find food. They skip over it in the movie, but the District 12 market is full of wild game. Even the Peacekeepers buy it, IIRC.[/quote]

    Why would it be a concrete wasteland? Its in the middle of coal-mining country, they generally would have houses made out of wood due to its abundance in the area. I thought the movie did a great job of capturing a suffering downtrodden coal-mining town. This was especially true when you then compare it to the lavishness of the capitol. Katniss was a little too cleaned up in the beginning though, I will give you that.

  • a5ehrena5ehren AtlantaRegistered User regular
    edited March 2012
    SniperGuy wrote: »
    mcdermott wrote: »
    Pailryder wrote: »
    i'm trying to see if the concept of a communist russia fits with the concept of the districts (protecterates) and the capitol (moscow). i mean, look at how horrible the conditions in the eastern block countries were/are and it doesn't seem a far leap. I don't get how people think the concept doesn't make sense.
    Spoiler:

    note i'm not defending the book/movie i'm just trying to say that i don't think it's a stretch to believe the circumstances.

    That's true. 74 years isn't all that long.

    It's definitely long enough to beat submission into plenty of people though. However in the books (massive book spoilers)
    Spoiler:

    Book 3 Spoilers
    Spoiler:

    a5ehren on
  • Boring7Boring7 Registered User regular
    a5ehren wrote: »
    SniperGuy wrote: »
    mcdermott wrote: »
    Pailryder wrote: »
    i'm trying to see if the concept of a communist russia fits with the concept of the districts (protecterates) and the capitol (moscow). i mean, look at how horrible the conditions in the eastern block countries were/are and it doesn't seem a far leap. I don't get how people think the concept doesn't make sense.
    Spoiler:

    note i'm not defending the book/movie i'm just trying to say that i don't think it's a stretch to believe the circumstances.

    That's true. 74 years isn't all that long.

    It's definitely long enough to beat submission into plenty of people though. However in the books (massive book spoilers)
    Spoiler:

    Book 3 Spoilers
    Spoiler:
    Spoiler:

    Thanatos wrote: »
    Goldman Sachs may as well be named COBRA.
  • a5ehrena5ehren AtlantaRegistered User regular
    Boring7 wrote: »
    a5ehren wrote: »
    SniperGuy wrote: »
    mcdermott wrote: »
    Pailryder wrote: »
    i'm trying to see if the concept of a communist russia fits with the concept of the districts (protecterates) and the capitol (moscow). i mean, look at how horrible the conditions in the eastern block countries were/are and it doesn't seem a far leap. I don't get how people think the concept doesn't make sense.
    Spoiler:

    note i'm not defending the book/movie i'm just trying to say that i don't think it's a stretch to believe the circumstances.

    That's true. 74 years isn't all that long.

    It's definitely long enough to beat submission into plenty of people though. However in the books (massive book spoilers)
    Spoiler:

    Book 3 Spoilers
    Spoiler:
    Spoiler:

    What is this from?

  • Boring7Boring7 Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    Issue 14, last page. "I feel a column comin' on!"

    Edit: since a5ehren might want the full name: Transmetropolitan, essentially the story of Hunter S. Thompson and the election/presidency of Evil JFK set in a strange and far-flung future. It's more interesting than the Hunger games, but otherwise off-topic.
    Spoiler:

    Boring7 on
    Thanatos wrote: »
    Goldman Sachs may as well be named COBRA.
  • a5ehrena5ehren AtlantaRegistered User regular
    Never heard of that. Sounds interesting.

  • gjaustingjaustin Registered User regular
    I saw the movie this weekend, despite never having read the books and knowing very little about them.

    I enjoyed it and found it easy to follow. My only complaint is that I found the pacing a little slow around the start of the actual games.

    Your belief is not required
  • PellaeonPellaeon Registered User regular
    Delzhand wrote: »
    Jesus, what is even the point of trying, then?

    That was another problem I had with the actual Games. If the situation can constantly be manipulated by outside forces (including the people who are in charge of the Games), why would anyone care about the games or do things like bet money?

    If the line on Cowboys/Giants was Giants by 3 but there was the possibility that Jerry Jones might suddenly shoot fireballs at Eli Manning, not only am I not putting money down, I'm not giving a fuck about the outcome of the game.

    Who would give two shits about this stupid game?

    It's reality TV, not an organized sports league striving for parity. I'm sure there are people that bet on survivor, and would bet on "Survivor: Xtreme! Death edition! Now with children!" were it a thing.

  • DoodmannDoodmann Registered User regular
    a5ehren wrote: »
    Never heard of that. Sounds interesting.

    It's definitely a must read. Probably one of the best comic books to come out in the last 10 years.

Sign In or Register to comment.