Saw this today. I liked it, but I think I had low expectations because people compared it to Twilight (although that's probably going to be the fate of pretty much anything with any fantasy element that also features a teen romance for a while).
Haven't read the book so there are a fair few bits in there that I assume are foreshadowing for the inevitable sequels because they didn't seem to add anything
(whatsisface back in the village, for example, and the apparent uprising that was never really expanded upon)
.
I suppose its main failing is that for a film in which a bunch of kids are murdered by other kids it never really felt like anyone was in any particular danger, and there is pretty much no dramatic tension during any of the fights.
also I'd definitely fall into the camp of saying it was too similar to the books, if anything. It just felt like they were trying to speed through all the major scenes/plot points and keep it at a reasonable (though still long) run time, robbing a lot of moments of their significance in the process
stuff like blowing up the supplies and Rue went by so fast that it didn't seem like they really mattered at all
. It's not as bad as say, watchmen, but similarly it's just too straight of an adaptation to be an enjoyable movie in its own right.
As someone who's never read the books, I thought it was well done and enjoyable. And I'm glad they went with the shaky-cam for certain moments - I wasn't really interested in seeing a SAW movie play out with teenagers.
0
Dark Raven XLaugh hard, run fast,be kindRegistered Userregular
So this sounds a lot like Battle Royale! And I liked Battle Royale. So I guess I'd probably like this too?
So this sounds a lot like Battle Royale! And I liked Battle Royale. So I guess I'd probably like this too?
Mix of Battle Royale and The Running Man (novel)
Less bloody and has main characters. (BR was all over the place, right?)
BR has main characters but the PoV does shift quite often.
Right.
You have the random groups and stuff being cut to and then dying and whatnot. Hunger Games just sticks with the POV of the main character and that stuff (other group issues) happens off camera.
Okay, I have to ask: the actor playing Peeta, he looks like a young Alan Tudyk. Like it wouldn't surprise me if they where related. Did anybody else get that vibe from him?
The sky was full of stars, every star an exploding ship. One of ours.
Okay, I have to ask: the actor playing Peeta, he looks like a young Alan Tudyk. Like it wouldn't surprise me if they where related. Did anybody else get that vibe from him?
Nope, he looks like an older version of this kid to me:
I chose where we had dinner, but my date chose the movie...
Hunger Games was not bad by any stretch of the imagination, but it's a movie aimed at people much younger than myself and so it didn't really do it for me, I felt like I had watched it all before (and I am not just talking about Battle Royale).
Woody Harrelson (as usual) did not fail to entertain, and I wish we could have seen more of Sutherland (also always great).
I saw the movie. It wasn't bad, but I was a bit disappointed. There was just so much better stuff they could've done with the premise.
I haven't read the book.
Here's the problems I had with the movie:
1. Almost none of the other kids had any characterization. There were so many opportunities to show all the other kids who were involved as people, even just with little distinguishing bits in like the pre-game training (ala Ruse stealing the knife). As it was, the vast majority of the kids were just faces and when they died you didn't really care.
2. More specifically on the characterization front: Ruse's relationship with Katniss is completely underdeveloped. They should've done more to show that Ruse was like a surrogate for Katniss' sister, and more to show what would drive Ruse to be so inherently trusting of Katniss. Also, I was extremely surprised that they didn't even implicitly touch upon the fact that, as the rules stood, Katniss and Ruse would have to kill each other eventually.
3. More generally on that point of the kids all having to kill each other eventually, they didn't touch upon this with the big gang of "bad kids". I would've at least expected something of a moment where they all suddenly realize what's coming and turn on each other, or at least that they would do something to show that they shouldn't just be implicitly trusting each other. There's only one winner; the fact that this wasn't a more important driving factor for the actions of the characters was bizarre.
4. The "rule change" bit was stupid. The whole thing would've had a much stronger impact if Katniss and [the leading boy who I forget his name] ended up deciding to work together in spite of the fact they knew they would have to kill each other eventually. You could've easily worked in the idea of Ruse's death affecting Katniss and making her change her mind about going it alone. The entire plot would've been the same up until the end without that totally retarded "I was just kidding now you guys do have to kill each other" flip flop.
Winky, your first 3 points are problems I had with the movie also, but mostly because they are addressed in the book and were left out of the movie which I found annoying. I don't remember how your last point plays out in the book exactly.
That is what you get when you try to portray R-rated bloodbath in PG-13. 15 years ago, it would have been R and kids would have gone to see it anyway. These days its PG-13 all the way and we get shaky cam deaths.
Thank you Steven Spielberg and Joseph Lieberman.
(Spielberg for suggesting a PG-13 rating and Lieberman for making it illegal to market R rated movies to teens).
Err, no? It's based on a book aimed at the young teen market.
I am aware that its based on a book. THE MOVIE on the other hand has to show the violence and what would be youth oriented fiction on the page is R-rated violence on screen.
The movie chooses to show it with shaky cam in order to get a pg-13 rating. Which in years passed would have shot as a R-rated movie and shown to teens anyways. Halloween, Nightmare on Elm street, Scream where all R rated movies marketed to teen audiences.
With the PG-13 rating movies get water down in order to be released to a teen audience. This was not the case in times passed.
The movie art form has suffered as a result, we get gobs of movies with water down violence getting pg-13 and hysterical R is a kid says fuck more then once.
The weird thing is that the film added kids being cut left and right around the cornucopia, but the much less extreme violence actually in the book was ridiculously watered down. For example, the "infected leg wound" was a scratch. If you can't show swelling, discoloration, or puss, at least add some flies or something.
Hell, they couldn't even deliver the medicine via syringe. What kind of serious problem can be solved with Icy Hot cream?
For question #3, above, that's actually one of the things I feel the book didn't need to explain, as it's a staple of reality TV and geopolitics. By forming an alliance, you ensure that you'll be in the final five or so both through sheer killing power and by the tactical use of force giving control of all the resources in the cornucopia while everyone else tries to come up with his own resources.
I just thought of another plot hole that the movie put in for no reason:
Where the fuck did Peeta get structured stone makeup? In the book, he was pretending to be mud and maybe algea. In the movie, he was a fucking rock.
0
MalReynoldsThe Hunter S Thompson of incredibly mild medicinesRegistered Userregular
In the movie, it was implied if you impressed your trainers and the gamemakers that they would put items in the cornucopia that were beneficial. I took it to mean either they put something in there like that when they saw him do up his arm (which is acceptable) or he's just that good (which is completely unacceptable).
"A new take on the epic fantasy genre... Darkly comic, relatable characters... twisted storyline."
"Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback!
In the movie, it was implied if you impressed your trainers and the gamemakers that they would put items in the cornucopia that were beneficial. I took it to mean either they put something in there like that when they saw him do up his arm (which is acceptable) or he's just that good (which is completely unacceptable).
Alternatively, the movie made a big deal out of sponsors - isn't it possible that
Peeta received a makeup kit via a sponsor, and we just didn't see it?
0
HonkHonk is this poster.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
I never heard about this until last week or so. It peeked my interest because of three things:
1. The main character (Katniss?) has the silliest name I've ever heard.
2. It apparently broke box office records - a film that I had never heard anything about.
3. The description reads exactly like battle royale, but televised. So like battle royale I guess.
So color me interested, I will probably go see it.
I never heard about this until last week or so. It peeked my interest because of three things:
1. The main character (Katniss?) has the silliest name I've ever heard.
It's a plant that she's named after. Her dad is a bit of a hippy.
Self-righteousness is incompatible with coalition building.
0
HonkHonk is this poster.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
Should have named her Sagittaria! That is a cool name!
I read the books a while back and my wife and I saw teh movie Friday. I thought the movie was quite good and probably an example of a time when the movie stays actually quite close to the book. I wish they could have done some more character development with some of the minor characters, but then the movie would have been about 3 hours long. Maybe the DVD will have an extended cut or soemthing.
I never heard about this until last week or so. It peeked my interest because of three things:
1. The main character (Katniss?) has the silliest name I've ever heard.
It's a plant that she's named after. Her dad is a bit of a hippy.
I bet the school yard was cruel to her. "Cat piss! Cat piss!"
Question for those who've read the books and seen the movie:
How was Cato's death handled? Was it the drawn out gruesome thing that it was in the book that rammed home how fucked up the whole situation was?
Nope.
He falls off like he does in the book and he's screaming as the dogs tear at him and then Katniss arrows him again after he shouts (I think) "Please! OH GOD"
I overall thought it was really good, but it's absolutely a movie for people who have read the book. Otherwise there are lots of places where I think the average viewer would be very confused.
Stanley Tucci, and Woody Harrelson were outstanding though.
Spoilery discussion:
My one major complaint was that they never showed the tributes get picked up by hovercraft and thus also never demonstrated that the dog creatures were created out of the bodies of the fallen tributes.
Only so much you can do in the time frame and it was a two and a half hour flick. Oh, Elizabeth Banks did a great job too.
My one major complaint was that they never showed the tributes get picked up by hovercraft and thus also never demonstrated that the dog creatures were created out of the bodies of the fallen tributes.
Only so much you can do in the time frame and it was a two and a half hour flick. Oh, Elizabeth Banks did a great job too.
That's one of the best changes that was made, and thank god it was changed.. While reading the book, I actually set it down at that point and checked wikipedia to make sure the person that lent me the book wasn't playing a joke on me.
My one major complaint was that they never showed the tributes get picked up by hovercraft and thus also never demonstrated that the dog creatures were created out of the bodies of the fallen tributes.
Only so much you can do in the time frame and it was a two and a half hour flick. Oh, Elizabeth Banks did a great job too.
That's one of the best changes that was made, and thank god it was changed.. While reading the book, I actually set it down at that point and checked wikipedia to make sure the person that lent me the book wasn't playing a joke on me.
Whaaaat. That was one of the best parts of the book.
It really demonstrated that the people running this show had all sorts of technological prowess and had no qualms about using it in sick and twisted ways. It was horrifying.
My one major complaint was that they never showed the tributes get picked up by hovercraft and thus also never demonstrated that the dog creatures were created out of the bodies of the fallen tributes.
Only so much you can do in the time frame and it was a two and a half hour flick. Oh, Elizabeth Banks did a great job too.
That's one of the best changes that was made, and thank god it was changed.. While reading the book, I actually set it down at that point and checked wikipedia to make sure the person that lent me the book wasn't playing a joke on me.
Whaaaat. That was one of the best parts of the book.
It really demonstrated that the people running this show had all sorts of technological prowess and had no qualms about using it in sick and twisted ways. It was horrifying.
My one major complaint was that they never showed the tributes get picked up by hovercraft and thus also never demonstrated that the dog creatures were created out of the bodies of the fallen tributes.
Only so much you can do in the time frame and it was a two and a half hour flick. Oh, Elizabeth Banks did a great job too.
That's one of the best changes that was made, and thank god it was changed.. While reading the book, I actually set it down at that point and checked wikipedia to make sure the person that lent me the book wasn't playing a joke on me.
Whaaaat. That was one of the best parts of the book.
It really demonstrated that the people running this show had all sorts of technological prowess and had no qualms about using it in sick and twisted ways. It was horrifying.
I agree. Three things were missing that upset me a little bit:
1. The hovercraft picking up bodies. Though I can understand why this was excised.
2. Haymitch sobering up. Haymitch is an interesting character. I kind of wish they developed him a lot more than they did. They basically did nothing with him.
3. Rue's district sponsoring a gift for Katniss. I thought this was very important, personally, and I can understand that there wasn't enough room for it in the film, but I still feel like it was important. I mean, it is only symbolic, really, but it is still important. They kind of supplant this with showing District 11 physically rioting, but I still feel like it would have been better for this point not to be pushed through so quickly.
Maybe if it had been handled by a more competent writer it would have been compelling (though I doubt it). As written it was so laughably bad as to retroactively ruin the rest of the book and destroyed any interest I had in continuing to read the series.
Maybe if it had been handled by a more competent writer it would have been compelling (though I doubt it). As written it was so laughably bad as to retroactively ruin the rest of the book and destroyed any interest in continuing to read the series.
Tell us how you really feel.
Don't hold back now.
Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
0
MalReynoldsThe Hunter S Thompson of incredibly mild medicinesRegistered Userregular
Maybe if it had been handled by a more competent writer it would have been compelling (though I doubt it). As written it was so laughably bad as to retroactively ruin the rest of the book and destroyed any interest in continuing to read the series.
I pretty much agree with this 100%. The end of the first book made me not want to continue the series because of how poorly it was handled, and I'm glad they made that change in the movie.
Also, they don't make a big deal about Haymitch sobering up, but as soon as he starts taking his duties seriously, and this was a really subtle thing, it was over dinner, and he puts his hand over his glass so they stop refilling it. A nice touch.
"A new take on the epic fantasy genre... Darkly comic, relatable characters... twisted storyline."
"Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback!
My one major complaint was that they never showed the tributes get picked up by hovercraft and thus also never demonstrated that the dog creatures were created out of the bodies of the fallen tributes.
Only so much you can do in the time frame and it was a two and a half hour flick. Oh, Elizabeth Banks did a great job too.
That's one of the best changes that was made, and thank god it was changed.. While reading the book, I actually set it down at that point and checked wikipedia to make sure the person that lent me the book wasn't playing a joke on me.
Whaaaat. That was one of the best parts of the book.
It really demonstrated that the people running this show had all sorts of technological prowess and had no qualms about using it in sick and twisted ways. It was horrifying.
I agree. Three things were missing that upset me a little bit:
1. The hovercraft picking up bodies. Though I can understand why this was excised.
2. Haymitch sobering up. Haymitch is an interesting character. I kind of wish they developed him a lot more than they did. They basically did nothing with him.
3. Rue's district sponsoring a gift for Katniss. I thought this was very important, personally, and I can understand that there wasn't enough room for it in the film, but I still feel like it was important. I mean, it is only symbolic, really, but it is still important. They kind of supplant this with showing District 11 physically rioting, but I still feel like it would have been better for this point not to be pushed through so quickly.
As far as 2 goes, they didn't rather subtly. Like, there's a visible difference in his behavior in the beginning, and later during the games. Also, during the preparation, he actually refuses the slave from getting him something to drink while he's talking with Katniss and Peeta. It could be more emphasized, but I think it was handled pretty well.
They acted like some masterpiece was the dogs. this was dumb, if they were going to change the fact that it was the faces of the kids on the genetically modified animals(which they basically didnt touch upon) to add to the PTSD effect in the end, they should of just picked an animal that was much more horrifying or fucked up. the director looking at a dog and releasing them like they were some sort of fucking masterpiece was dumb as shit.
Loved the movie over all, but they left alot of shit in that dosen't make sense without knowing what katniss is thinking from the books.
My one major complaint was that they never showed the tributes get picked up by hovercraft and thus also never demonstrated that the dog creatures were created out of the bodies of the fallen tributes.
Only so much you can do in the time frame and it was a two and a half hour flick. Oh, Elizabeth Banks did a great job too.
That's one of the best changes that was made, and thank god it was changed.. While reading the book, I actually set it down at that point and checked wikipedia to make sure the person that lent me the book wasn't playing a joke on me.
Whaaaat. That was one of the best parts of the book.
It really demonstrated that the people running this show had all sorts of technological prowess and had no qualms about using it in sick and twisted ways. It was horrifying.
I agree. Three things were missing that upset me a little bit:
1. The hovercraft picking up bodies. Though I can understand why this was excised.
2. Haymitch sobering up. Haymitch is an interesting character. I kind of wish they developed him a lot more than they did. They basically did nothing with him.
3. Rue's district sponsoring a gift for Katniss. I thought this was very important, personally, and I can understand that there wasn't enough room for it in the film, but I still feel like it was important. I mean, it is only symbolic, really, but it is still important. They kind of supplant this with showing District 11 physically rioting, but I still feel like it would have been better for this point not to be pushed through so quickly.
I actually disagree with point 2. I think Haymitch was great in the movie, and got more to do than he did in the book. You get to see him influence whatshisname to make the change to let bot Katniss and Peeta live. You get to see him talking up sponsors. And you do see him sobering up. He refuses a drink in at least one scene.
and I think they filmed the gift from District 11, but cut it for time. Maybe in the DVD.
Other thoughts on changes
I didn't mind them changing the dogs at the end -- it would have looked ridiculous if they tried to do it the way it was, and...yeah, I feel like the fact that the dogs were actually the tributes was kind of pointless and didn't add anything. I mean, we already know the people in charge are fucked up just from the fact that they have the games at all. We already know they have crazy science powers thanks to the fact that they were flinging fire and bringing down trees and genetically engineering wasps like it wasn't anything at all.
My big "why did they get rid of that?" had to do with Katniss's love affair with food.
Overall, I liked the book and the movie about the same, really. And I actually liked Movie Katniss more than Book Katniss, but I've only read the first book so far.
My one major complaint was that they never showed the tributes get picked up by hovercraft and thus also never demonstrated that the dog creatures were created out of the bodies of the fallen tributes.
Only so much you can do in the time frame and it was a two and a half hour flick. Oh, Elizabeth Banks did a great job too.
That's one of the best changes that was made, and thank god it was changed.. While reading the book, I actually set it down at that point and checked wikipedia to make sure the person that lent me the book wasn't playing a joke on me.
Whaaaat. That was one of the best parts of the book.
It really demonstrated that the people running this show had all sorts of technological prowess and had no qualms about using it in sick and twisted ways. It was horrifying.
I agree. Three things were missing that upset me a little bit:
1. The hovercraft picking up bodies. Though I can understand why this was excised.
2. Haymitch sobering up. Haymitch is an interesting character. I kind of wish they developed him a lot more than they did. They basically did nothing with him.
3. Rue's district sponsoring a gift for Katniss. I thought this was very important, personally, and I can understand that there wasn't enough room for it in the film, but I still feel like it was important. I mean, it is only symbolic, really, but it is still important. They kind of supplant this with showing District 11 physically rioting, but I still feel like it would have been better for this point not to be pushed through so quickly.
I actually disagree with point 2. I think Haymitch was great in the movie, and got more to do than he did in the book. You get to see him influence whatshisname to make the change to let bot Katniss and Peeta live. You get to see him talking up sponsors. And you do see him sobering up. He refuses a drink in at least one scene.
and I think they filmed the gift from District 11, but cut it for time. Maybe in the DVD.
Other thoughts on changes
I didn't mind them changing the dogs at the end -- it would have looked ridiculous if they tried to do it the way it was, and...yeah, I feel like the fact that the dogs were actually the tributes was kind of pointless and didn't add anything. I mean, we already know the people in charge are fucked up just from the fact that they have the games at all. We already know they have crazy science powers thanks to the fact that they were flinging fire and bringing down trees and genetically engineering wasps like it wasn't anything at all.
My big "why did they get rid of that?" had to do with Katniss's love affair with food.
Overall, I liked the book and the movie about the same, really. And I actually liked Movie Katniss more than Book Katniss, but I've only read the first book so far.
Lack of the plum soup was terrible I say!
I think they could have had a few of the tributes have particular eye makeup of some sort, or some specific eye trait they could have carried over to the creatures. Then have Katniss get pinned and take a brief slowmo shot as she stares at the face before Peeta smacks it with a rock and they run off. I get why they left it out, but they could have made the dogs a helluva lot scarier to compensate. That part felt pretty flat. Rue's death was really well done though, and I really liked the District 11 riot.
If the first text on the front of movie didn't tell you it was north america, would you think things like "mockingjays" and "Trackerjackers" were genetically modified creatures, or that they were on a different planet/alternate fantasy world? I felt like they did 0 explanation to any of that and it was a huge issue. Where as the "finale" could of easily been done if they ignored the part they actually used. Later in the other books (spoilers), the images of the creatures leave the idea that the capital could use and abuse you after death, which worsens the PTSD they already have. It's also an allegory to how a government will abuse the idea of you even after you think they are "done" with you. It's pretty important unless you are ignoring the intent of the novel and just trying to tell the story.
And yeah, it was fucked they removed almost everything dealing with food in the movie.
If the first text on the front of movie didn't tell you it was north america, would you think things like "mockingjays" and "Trackerjackers" were genetically modified creatures, or that they were on a different planet/alternate fantasy world? I felt like they did 0 explanation to any of that and it was a huge issue. Where as the "finale" could of easily been done if they ignored the part they actually used. Later in the other books (spoilers), the images of the creatures leave the idea that the capital could use and abuse you after death, which worsens the PTSD they already have. It's also an allegory to how a government will abuse the idea of you even after you think they are "done" with you. It's pretty important unless you are ignoring the intent of the novel and just trying to tell the story.
And yeah, it was fucked they removed almost everything dealing with food in the movie.
Well, I mean, they explicitly say that trackerjackers were genetically modified, so I like to think I'd have worked it out. :P
Regardless of anything else we may disagree about, I am sure we can all find some common ground in this:
Posts
Yeah, but Malkor's theater was in The Capitol.
Haven't read the book so there are a fair few bits in there that I assume are foreshadowing for the inevitable sequels because they didn't seem to add anything
I suppose its main failing is that for a film in which a bunch of kids are murdered by other kids it never really felt like anyone was in any particular danger, and there is pretty much no dramatic tension during any of the fights.
EDIT: I should probably spoiler that.
As someone who's never read the books, I thought it was well done and enjoyable. And I'm glad they went with the shaky-cam for certain moments - I wasn't really interested in seeing a SAW movie play out with teenagers.
Less bloody and has main characters. (BR was all over the place, right?)
BR has main characters but the PoV does shift quite often.
You have the random groups and stuff being cut to and then dying and whatnot. Hunger Games just sticks with the POV of the main character and that stuff (other group issues) happens off camera.
That's more of what I was trying to get across.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H7PC1dKC8CI
Hunger Games was not bad by any stretch of the imagination, but it's a movie aimed at people much younger than myself and so it didn't really do it for me, I felt like I had watched it all before (and I am not just talking about Battle Royale).
Woody Harrelson (as usual) did not fail to entertain, and I wish we could have seen more of Sutherland (also always great).
I haven't read the book.
Here's the problems I had with the movie:
2. More specifically on the characterization front: Ruse's relationship with Katniss is completely underdeveloped. They should've done more to show that Ruse was like a surrogate for Katniss' sister, and more to show what would drive Ruse to be so inherently trusting of Katniss. Also, I was extremely surprised that they didn't even implicitly touch upon the fact that, as the rules stood, Katniss and Ruse would have to kill each other eventually.
3. More generally on that point of the kids all having to kill each other eventually, they didn't touch upon this with the big gang of "bad kids". I would've at least expected something of a moment where they all suddenly realize what's coming and turn on each other, or at least that they would do something to show that they shouldn't just be implicitly trusting each other. There's only one winner; the fact that this wasn't a more important driving factor for the actions of the characters was bizarre.
4. The "rule change" bit was stupid. The whole thing would've had a much stronger impact if Katniss and [the leading boy who I forget his name] ended up deciding to work together in spite of the fact they knew they would have to kill each other eventually. You could've easily worked in the idea of Ruse's death affecting Katniss and making her change her mind about going it alone. The entire plot would've been the same up until the end without that totally retarded "I was just kidding now you guys do have to kill each other" flip flop.
The weird thing is that the film added kids being cut left and right around the cornucopia, but the much less extreme violence actually in the book was ridiculously watered down. For example, the "infected leg wound" was a scratch. If you can't show swelling, discoloration, or puss, at least add some flies or something.
Hell, they couldn't even deliver the medicine via syringe. What kind of serious problem can be solved with Icy Hot cream?
For question #3, above, that's actually one of the things I feel the book didn't need to explain, as it's a staple of reality TV and geopolitics. By forming an alliance, you ensure that you'll be in the final five or so both through sheer killing power and by the tactical use of force giving control of all the resources in the cornucopia while everyone else tries to come up with his own resources.
I just thought of another plot hole that the movie put in for no reason:
"Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor
My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback!
Alternatively, the movie made a big deal out of sponsors - isn't it possible that
1. The main character (Katniss?) has the silliest name I've ever heard.
2. It apparently broke box office records - a film that I had never heard anything about.
3. The description reads exactly like battle royale, but televised. So like battle royale I guess.
So color me interested, I will probably go see it.
It's a plant that she's named after. Her dad is a bit of a hippy.
Katniss, pfffttttttt.
Overall: Good flick, would recommend to others.
I bet the school yard was cruel to her. "Cat piss! Cat piss!"
Nope.
I overall thought it was really good, but it's absolutely a movie for people who have read the book. Otherwise there are lots of places where I think the average viewer would be very confused.
Stanley Tucci, and Woody Harrelson were outstanding though.
Spoilery discussion:
Only so much you can do in the time frame and it was a two and a half hour flick. Oh, Elizabeth Banks did a great job too.
SniperGuyGaming on PSN / SniperGuy710 on Xbone Live
That's one of the best changes that was made, and thank god it was changed.. While reading the book, I actually set it down at that point and checked wikipedia to make sure the person that lent me the book wasn't playing a joke on me.
Whaaaat. That was one of the best parts of the book.
SniperGuyGaming on PSN / SniperGuy710 on Xbone Live
They all looked the same in the movie.
I agree. Three things were missing that upset me a little bit:
2. Haymitch sobering up. Haymitch is an interesting character. I kind of wish they developed him a lot more than they did. They basically did nothing with him.
3. Rue's district sponsoring a gift for Katniss. I thought this was very important, personally, and I can understand that there wasn't enough room for it in the film, but I still feel like it was important. I mean, it is only symbolic, really, but it is still important. They kind of supplant this with showing District 11 physically rioting, but I still feel like it would have been better for this point not to be pushed through so quickly.
Tell us how you really feel.
Don't hold back now.
I pretty much agree with this 100%. The end of the first book made me not want to continue the series because of how poorly it was handled, and I'm glad they made that change in the movie.
Also, they don't make a big deal about Haymitch sobering up, but as soon as he starts taking his duties seriously, and this was a really subtle thing, it was over dinner, and he puts his hand over his glass so they stop refilling it. A nice touch.
"Readers who prefer tension and romance, Maledictions: The Offering, delivers... As serious YA fiction, I’ll give it five stars out of five. As a novel? Four and a half." - Liz Ellor
My new novel: Maledictions: The Offering. Now in Paperback!
As far as 2 goes, they didn't rather subtly. Like, there's a visible difference in his behavior in the beginning, and later during the games. Also, during the preparation, he actually refuses the slave from getting him something to drink while he's talking with Katniss and Peeta. It could be more emphasized, but I think it was handled pretty well.
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile
Loved the movie over all, but they left alot of shit in that dosen't make sense without knowing what katniss is thinking from the books.
SniperGuyGaming on PSN / SniperGuy710 on Xbone Live
and I think they filmed the gift from District 11, but cut it for time. Maybe in the DVD.
Other thoughts on changes
My big "why did they get rid of that?" had to do with Katniss's love affair with food.
Overall, I liked the book and the movie about the same, really. And I actually liked Movie Katniss more than Book Katniss, but I've only read the first book so far.
3DS: 1607-3034-6970
I think they could have had a few of the tributes have particular eye makeup of some sort, or some specific eye trait they could have carried over to the creatures. Then have Katniss get pinned and take a brief slowmo shot as she stares at the face before Peeta smacks it with a rock and they run off. I get why they left it out, but they could have made the dogs a helluva lot scarier to compensate. That part felt pretty flat. Rue's death was really well done though, and I really liked the District 11 riot.
SniperGuyGaming on PSN / SniperGuy710 on Xbone Live
My favorite part (spoilerish I guess?):
And yeah, it was fucked they removed almost everything dealing with food in the movie.
Regardless of anything else we may disagree about, I am sure we can all find some common ground in this:
Effie was flawless.
3DS: 1607-3034-6970
I agree, actually. That was a very good addition, great decision to break with the book on that.
3DS Friend Code: 3110-5393-4113
Steam profile