Was the subplot about Peeta selling her out to the D1/D2 kids ever resolved? It just seemed like Peeta disappeared from the story for a while after forming an alliance with the douchekids, and then is suddenly found injured, wherein Katniss forgets to ever bring up the fact that he tried to get her killed.
When they discuss his wound he mentions that it was from "a sword" which is clearly what Cato was using. He also convinced them to stop attacking her in the tree. He pretty clearly was doing it to trick them/stay alive for a while.
Yeah, it's a little less obvious in the movie, but in the book it's spelled out pretty clearly that he joined up with them to help keep her alive. He didn't tell them about her archery skills, he got them to back off when she was in the tree, he told her to run after the tracker jacker attack (which is why Cato attacked and tried to kill him), etc.
edit: remember, she got a higher score than anyone else in the games, so they had her marked as a target right from the start.
As an aside, if we had some sort of VR game where we could construct large elaborate arenas and let people fight it out in a digital arena with the same rules/random shit happening I would totally watch that.
Why is the Capitol any worse than the previous alternative?
Because the people in the districts can clearly see that they are starving while the people in the Capitol are living like wasteful kings.
Except those things aren't established in the film. They may be in the books. I didn't read the books. I saw the movie. Nothing about the pre-Capitol history of the Districts is established. The Capitol may have been an awesome alternative, for all we know.
No they're clearly inferred from the movie. It's obvious. It's not explicitly spelled out in a 5 minute exposition before the film.
The only thing clearly inferred is that the Capitol sucks. Nothing regarding their rise to power or what the Districts lost is ever broached.
It's not clearly inferred that people lost their freedom when you compare the Capitol to the districts?
Did you see the same movie I did?
The Capitol and Districts both existed before the rebellion that resulted in the Hunger Games. It's not clear when the Districts lost their freedom, or if they ever had any.
It is clear that some people have a helluva lot more freedom. The people in the capitol live in excess, forcing others to work in squalor.
Did the districts exist before the hunger games rebellion? I'm not certain on that one.
At this point, I am pretty sure, at least in the books, The Capital is an allegory for the %1 of America, they live in opulence while the various Districts live in different levels of squalor and are the 99%, the police/military being among the most privileged of the oppressed when they should join with the other Districts against The Capital. Many barely have access to basic medical services due to lack of insurance and yet America has some of the most advanced medical services in the world if you have the means. America, how does it work? Why don't people rebel? Oh wait, they do in some places, yet things keep on keeping on. It really is America taken to an extreme post apocalyptic future where the 1% win, again. Feudalism 2.0 Fallout's Enclave winning and so forth.
Why is the Capitol any worse than the previous alternative?
Because the people in the districts can clearly see that they are starving while the people in the Capitol are living like wasteful kings.
Except those things aren't established in the film. They may be in the books. I didn't read the books. I saw the movie. Nothing about the pre-Capitol history of the Districts is established. The Capitol may have been an awesome alternative, for all we know.
No they're clearly inferred from the movie. It's obvious. It's not explicitly spelled out in a 5 minute exposition before the film.
The only thing clearly inferred is that the Capitol sucks. Nothing regarding their rise to power or what the Districts lost is ever broached.
It's not clearly inferred that people lost their freedom when you compare the Capitol to the districts?
Did you see the same movie I did?
The Capitol and Districts both existed before the rebellion that resulted in the Hunger Games. It's not clear when the Districts lost their freedom, or if they ever had any.
It is clear that some people have a helluva lot more freedom. The people in the capitol live in excess, forcing others to work in squalor.
Did the districts exist before the hunger games rebellion? I'm not certain on that one.
At this point, I am pretty sure, at least in the books, The Capital is an allegory for the %1 of America, they live in opulence while the various Districts live in different levels of squalor and are the 99%, the police/military being among the most privileged of the oppressed when they should join with the other Districts against The Capital. Many barely have access to basic medical services due to lack of insurance and yet America has some of the most advanced medical services in the world if you have the means. America, how does it work? Why don't people rebel? Oh wait, they do in some places, yet things keep on keeping on. It really is America taken to an extreme post apocalyptic future where the 1% win, again. Feudalism 2.0 Fallout's Enclave winning and so forth.
Plus the 1% have figured out a way to keep the 99% from even seeing how well the 1% have it. And to barricade themselves so far away from the 99% that they never have to deal with them.
Well, the Hunger Games are a part of an agreement made between the districts and The Capitol after the war. The districts have to send a certain amount of their goods/products (i.e. coal in district 12, and perhaps some merchants have to send some of their products as well like Peeta's family having to send bread?) to The Capitol and then in order to remind the districts who is boss, they have to select 1 boy and 1 girl to fight to the death in the Hunger Games. Its just an annual reminder to show that "Hey, you guys screwed up and tried rebelling against us, this is what you get. Don't think about trying that one again or we'll do something worse next time."
That doesn't actually make sense, though. Beating your defeated enemies over the head in perpetuity is a good way to make them rise up again and again. If you rule through fear you only keep control for as long as their fear of your reprisal is greater than their fear of daily life. And what's the Capitol going to do? Kill them all? Every part of this nation is dependent upon every other part for goods and services. If the Capitol kills everyone in District 12 - or even a lot of them - that means not enough coal for the Capitol or the other 11 Districts.
Also I think the reason the people in the Capitol are so excited about it is because honestly to me the book describes Capitol citizens as pretty unintelligent. So I imagine the people in the Capitol as lazy and dumb (think Idiocracy if any of you have seen that movie).
Which also doesn't make sense. It's easy to say "Lol they're evil and dumb", but these are the people ruling a nation that spans most of North America. They are technological wizards and, apparently, artists. They can't be a city of total morons, and comic-book-style villainy simply doesn't exist. Nobody is evil just because.
So I take it that you don't believe in the Belgian Congo? I mean, twentieth century Belgian culture was based on chopping the hands off small children, and it wasn't until the 1960's that the Congo was able to gain independence, at which point Belgium conspired to have the Congo destroyed by civil war.
Yes the districts existed before the rebellion. That point is more clear in the books and is inferred upon in the start of the movie with how it refers to districts I felt..
minor spoiler from the books, probably safe to read if you are only familiar with the story from the first book.
There were more then 12 districts, one of them was pretty strong, and the capitol wiped it off the face of the earth to be sure.
they have airpower and nukes and the other districts don't. except for 13.
I agree that the movie doesn't do a good job of explaining this, but it isn't entirely necessary for the story to make sense.
Don't forget geographic advantages of only being accessible via a single, miles long tunnel. Hell, the main reason Ethiopia avoided being conquered by Europe was the fact that it's a plateau (and Italy called dibs, which removed all effective threats).
Uh, yes it is? You see tons of people in the Capitol. What part needs to be spelled out? It's very easily inferred.
Well, due to the film's issues with spacial perception, I actually have no idea how big the Capitol is vs. any other district. All we see is a single city, and not one that's all that big. Plus, one city can't exert military control over a huge nation of people in the event of rebellion.
And at no point in the film is there any indication that the Capitol has a contingency plan for labor if the Districts rebel.
It's implied, at least in the books, that it's not a huge nation of people. By my memory, at least.
It's like 13 midsize rural districts with a small city in each. Every district is penned in like animals by a giant electric fence, and if they catch you outside that fence they will kill you. If you are lucky. These districts are then connected to the Capitol by trains, which pull out whatever goods or resources are produced, and bring in some subsistence level from the other districts.
They control this "huge nation of people" by keeping them geographically separated, isolated, hungry, and presumably (through hunger) the populations relatively small. That and the threat of "Hey, remember District 13? No, you don't."
The real question is just how much of the resources from the districts they need in the Capitol. Some they fairly clearly do, some they fairly clearly do not (I get the impression that the coal mined in the Seam is intended for other districts, not the Capitol).
The best image I can come up with is the size of England versus all the shit it got up to. Hell, it was probably the least interventionist of the colonial powers. The Capitol is likely closer to France, Spain, or, god help the districts, Belgium. Not only are there various ways of blocking the unity of the districts (nothing as clever as the way Britain kept the Tutsis and Hutus at odds, but still), but is also careful to make sure each district has a monopoly on each of the necessities of any sort of military. For example, District 3 can manufacture weapons, but has no fuel or provisions.
I mean, twentieth century Belgian culture was based on chopping the hands off small children
What?
Every male in the Congo over walking age was expected to meet a barely possible quota every week (what it was a quota of varied by district), with the punishment for a slow week being one's right hand. Given that variation over time exists, most workers make do with one hand by retirement age. No, I don't know how they didn't run out of people. Apparently, though, the guy who set this system up, Leopold II, is now known as "The Builder King" because he used the proceeds to build a shitton of monuments before his atrocities were uncovered and the operation... nationalized. Looks like the Belgian people wanted a piece of that hot hand action.
Meanwhile, Germany was perfecting its genocide techniques by forcing uncooperative tribes into the desert and fencing them in to die, and Great Britain was inventing the concentration camp.
Was the subplot about Peeta selling her out to the D1/D2 kids ever resolved? It just seemed like Peeta disappeared from the story for a while after forming an alliance with the douchekids, and then is suddenly found injured, wherein Katniss forgets to ever bring up the fact that he tried to get her killed.
The first time you see Peeta with the careers he's leading them the wrong way, telling them she went in a direction she did not. When they have her trapped in a tree, he buys her time by convincing them to wait her out. After the trackerjacker nest gets dropped and she's wandering around hallucinating, he's the first one back to her, screaming at her to run. He and Cato clearly have a confrontation off-screen leading to his wounded leg and hiding in the stream. Prior to the Games beginning he goes out of his way to make her be seen more favorably during his interviews to increase her chances at sponsorship and winning. When they're on their podiums waiting for the start and she's eying that bow, he catches her eye and indicates that she needs to let it go and get out of there as Haymitch had advised, knowing the cornucopia will be an utter bloodbath.
How exactly did you ever believe that he had actually sold her out?
Again, it needs to be said that the majority of Districts don't have any kind of leverage over the Capitol. The products they provide could easily be created/obtained through other means - robots, mutations, etc. Those Districts that do provide things that could be a threat to the Capitol are treated much more fairly.
My biggest issue with the setting is why the non-critical Districts exist at all. It's just mind-blowingly wasteful to keep whole towns of (for all intents and purposes) useless people around. The extra Peacekeepers, the extra surveillance... that's the part I have a problem with. Then again, since the Capitol is all about gross extravagance, it's not out of character for them/it.
As far as the setting goes, here's my understanding of it (from the books... haven't seen the movie):
---
The US (and, presumably, the world, since the US falling wouldn't just happen) fell into chaos.
Out of that chaos, Panem emerged.
The Capitol was founded (presumably) by the winners of the post-apocalyptic power struggle. The Districts were made up of the losers.
After some time, the Districts decide to rebel.
The Capitol squashes the rebellion by wiping District 13 - the most powerful District and leader of the rebellion - off the map.
The other Districts, broken by the fact that the best of them was utterly destroyed, surrender.
The Capitol takes steps to ensure that rebellion won't happen again - electric fences around each District, extra security, extra surveillance, tightly controlled food rationing, constant pro-Capitol propaganda, swift and brutal punishment against any transgression, and, of course, the Hunger Games.
The people of the Districts eventually accept it all as facets of their lives. Most tend to hate the Games, but they feel powerless to fight against them and the Capitol.
---
I don't feel that the first three statements need to be fleshed out in order to make the story (which is about Katniss struggling against that backdrop) better. Katniss and the Games are so far removed from that, it hardly matters.
Was the subplot about Peeta selling her out to the D1/D2 kids ever resolved? It just seemed like Peeta disappeared from the story for a while after forming an alliance with the douchekids, and then is suddenly found injured, wherein Katniss forgets to ever bring up the fact that he tried to get her killed.
The first time you see Peeta with the careers he's leading them the wrong way, telling them she went in a direction she did not. When they have her trapped in a tree, he buys her time by convincing them to wait her out. After the trackerjacker nest gets dropped and she's wandering around hallucinating, he's the first one back to her, screaming at her to run. He and Cato clearly have a confrontation off-screen leading to his wounded leg and hiding in the stream. Prior to the Games beginning he goes out of his way to make her be seen more favorably during his interviews to increase her chances at sponsorship and winning. When they're on their podiums waiting for the start and she's eying that bow, he catches her eye and indicates that she needs to let it go and get out of there as Haymitch had advised, knowing the cornucopia will be an utter bloodbath.
How exactly did you ever believe that he had actually sold her out?
To be fair to Ross with regard to this specific observation, this is supposed to be a wtf moment, both in the books and the film. Particularly in te book, Peeta is described as being relatively weak with no particular skill at anything except makeup/art. So it is a bit surprising when he shows up allied with the career tributes.
Remember, at some point he refused to continue training with Katniss. Katniss doesn't know why, and neither do we - not right away. Also - and please correct me if I'm wrong here - doesn't Katniss (in the book) contemplate whether or not Peeta actually cares or is just trying to convince her out getting a weapon for herself that might eventually deplete his own survival odds?
In both the film and the book, she still walks toward te cornucopia. She hesitates - and that hesitation makes all the difference - but she doesn't readily accept Peeta's suggestion. The why of this isn't as apparent in the film, but those who did not read the book might draw the conclusion that Peeta is working for himself at that point. I don't think it is explicitly cemented at the point in time that Ross suggests that Peeta is only looking out for Katniss. We don't really get any confirmation until Peeta tells Katniss to run.
Switch: SW-7690-2320-9238Steam/PSN/Xbox: Drezdar
0
Options
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
Again, it needs to be said that the majority of Districts don't have any kind of leverage over the Capitol. The products they provide could easily be created/obtained through other means - robots, mutations, etc. Those Districts that do provide things that could be a threat to the Capitol are treated much more fairly.
My biggest issue with the setting is why the non-critical Districts exist at all. It's just mind-blowingly wasteful to keep whole towns of (for all intents and purposes) useless people around. The extra Peacekeepers, the extra surveillance... that's the part I have a problem with. Then again, since the Capitol is all about gross extravagance, it's not out of character for them/it.
By this logic why do we keep places like Iowa around when we can get our food cheaper in other places?
Again, it needs to be said that the majority of Districts don't have any kind of leverage over the Capitol. The products they provide could easily be created/obtained through other means - robots, mutations, etc. Those Districts that do provide things that could be a threat to the Capitol are treated much more fairly.
My biggest issue with the setting is why the non-critical Districts exist at all. It's just mind-blowingly wasteful to keep whole towns of (for all intents and purposes) useless people around. The extra Peacekeepers, the extra surveillance... that's the part I have a problem with. Then again, since the Capitol is all about gross extravagance, it's not out of character for them/it.
By this logic why do we keep places like Iowa around when we can get our food cheaper in other places?
Because we're not a dystopia that views the people in those areas as nothing more than fodder for our gladiatorial games?
I thought it was clearly obvious from 4-5 distinct events in the book how the whole thing works.
The introduction explains how things are
Katniss and Gale talk back and forth about hunting and living in the woods, explaining their squalor, which is touched upon a few times with food shipments, coal mining, and so on. I thought I remember Haymitch mentioning that the district that wins is often gifted more food and such. They also touch on what is probably explained better in the books with entering your name multiple times to get more supplies, which is fine, it's basically a lottery to them.
There are hints of district 13's demise here and there. This becomes critical in the next movies.
District 11's rebellion for the hunger games after Rue's death (which is different from the book?), which was quickly put down I think?
The hunger games were explained to be a way to give districts pride and opulence, in response for not rebelling. It works exactly like propaganda with entertainment. Propaganda is a powerful thing.
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
0
Options
AManFromEarthLet's get to twerk!The King in the SwampRegistered Userregular
Again, it needs to be said that the majority of Districts don't have any kind of leverage over the Capitol. The products they provide could easily be created/obtained through other means - robots, mutations, etc. Those Districts that do provide things that could be a threat to the Capitol are treated much more fairly.
My biggest issue with the setting is why the non-critical Districts exist at all. It's just mind-blowingly wasteful to keep whole towns of (for all intents and purposes) useless people around. The extra Peacekeepers, the extra surveillance... that's the part I have a problem with. Then again, since the Capitol is all about gross extravagance, it's not out of character for them/it.
By this logic why do we keep places like Iowa around when we can get our food cheaper in other places?
Because we're not a dystopia that views the people in those areas as nothing more than fodder for our gladiatorial games?
News to me.
But the point stands, why would a dystopia be more likely to not keep the place around than we are? If anything, they'd be more likely since characteristically countries like that hold on to size.
Again, it needs to be said that the majority of Districts don't have any kind of leverage over the Capitol. The products they provide could easily be created/obtained through other means - robots, mutations, etc. Those Districts that do provide things that could be a threat to the Capitol are treated much more fairly.
My biggest issue with the setting is why the non-critical Districts exist at all. It's just mind-blowingly wasteful to keep whole towns of (for all intents and purposes) useless people around. The extra Peacekeepers, the extra surveillance... that's the part I have a problem with. Then again, since the Capitol is all about gross extravagance, it's not out of character for them/it.
By this logic why do we keep places like Iowa around when we can get our food cheaper in other places?
Because we're not a dystopia that views the people in those areas as nothing more than fodder for our gladiatorial games?
News to me.
Lemme guess... you're going to bring up either the military, our prison system, or both, right?
But the point stands, why would a dystopia be more likely to not keep the place around than we are? If anything, they'd be more likely since characteristically countries like that hold on to size.
How many tyrannical countries do you know that have technology bordering on magic? How many tyrannical countries do you know that make no mention of religious or ethnic purity? The people in the Capitol don't care about the size of Panem. It's not a source of pride for them. What they do care about is how much more advanced they are compared to the Districts. It's a colonialist attitude presented without the desire to expand or to uplift/convert/save/teach/whatever the savages.
Again, it needs to be said that the majority of Districts don't have any kind of leverage over the Capitol. The products they provide could easily be created/obtained through other means - robots, mutations, etc. Those Districts that do provide things that could be a threat to the Capitol are treated much more fairly.
My biggest issue with the setting is why the non-critical Districts exist at all. It's just mind-blowingly wasteful to keep whole towns of (for all intents and purposes) useless people around. The extra Peacekeepers, the extra surveillance... that's the part I have a problem with. Then again, since the Capitol is all about gross extravagance, it's not out of character for them/it.
By this logic why do we keep places like Iowa around when we can get our food cheaper in other places?
Because we're not a dystopia that views the people in those areas as nothing more than fodder for our gladiatorial games?
News to me.
Lemme guess... you're going to bring up either the military, our prison system, or both, right?
But the point stands, why would a dystopia be more likely to not keep the place around than we are? If anything, they'd be more likely since characteristically countries like that hold on to size.
How many tyrannical countries do you know that have technology bordering on magic? How many tyrannical countries do you know that make no mention of religious or ethnic purity? The people in the Capitol don't care about the size of Panem. It's not a source of pride for them. What they do care about is how much more advanced they are compared to the Districts. It's a colonialist attitude presented without the desire to expand or to uplift/convert/save/teach/whatever the savages.
Actually "news to me" was a joke.
And you just explained why they have the other districts, the people in Britain didn't care about the size of the empire, they cared about the things they got from them.
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Again, it needs to be said that the majority of Districts don't have any kind of leverage over the Capitol. The products they provide could easily be created/obtained through other means - robots, mutations, etc. Those Districts that do provide things that could be a threat to the Capitol are treated much more fairly.
My biggest issue with the setting is why the non-critical Districts exist at all. It's just mind-blowingly wasteful to keep whole towns of (for all intents and purposes) useless people around. The extra Peacekeepers, the extra surveillance... that's the part I have a problem with. Then again, since the Capitol is all about gross extravagance, it's not out of character for them/it.
By this logic why do we keep places like Iowa around when we can get our food cheaper in other places?
Because we're not a dystopia that views the people in those areas as nothing more than fodder for our gladiatorial games?
News to me.
But the point stands, why would a dystopia be more likely to not keep the place around than we are? If anything, they'd be more likely since characteristically countries like that hold on to size.
It's all just kind of a little too convenient for the narrative, don't you think though?
The Capitol is self-sufficient, but spends who knows how much money propping up the districts . . . for what? Continued humiliation? That's not how an economy works. We wouldn't spend 90% of our GDP on projects that served no other purpose than to make fun of, say, Mexico.
The whole story falls out like this. Every little question or discrepancy is answered by a convenience that ensures that things have to be the way the story dictates, regardless of whether or not it makes any rational kind of sense.
The Capitol has no apparent collective national agency beyond fucking over people for something that happened almost 100 years ago:
Why can't the Districts rebel? The Capitol has the technological advantage.
Why can't the Districts provide for themselves? The Capitol won't let them.
Why do the Games exist in the first place? To remind the Districts that they suck.
Why can't people leave the Districts? The Capitol wants to keep them penned in.
Why does the Capitol need these people? To provide labor for the resources the Capital uses.
But I thought the Capitol had magical engineering technology? They do, they just like to fuck with everyone else.
Again, it needs to be said that the majority of Districts don't have any kind of leverage over the Capitol. The products they provide could easily be created/obtained through other means - robots, mutations, etc. Those Districts that do provide things that could be a threat to the Capitol are treated much more fairly.
My biggest issue with the setting is why the non-critical Districts exist at all. It's just mind-blowingly wasteful to keep whole towns of (for all intents and purposes) useless people around. The extra Peacekeepers, the extra surveillance... that's the part I have a problem with. Then again, since the Capitol is all about gross extravagance, it's not out of character for them/it.
By this logic why do we keep places like Iowa around when we can get our food cheaper in other places?
Because we're not a dystopia that views the people in those areas as nothing more than fodder for our gladiatorial games?
News to me.
Lemme guess... you're going to bring up either the military, our prison system, or both, right?
But the point stands, why would a dystopia be more likely to not keep the place around than we are? If anything, they'd be more likely since characteristically countries like that hold on to size.
How many tyrannical countries do you know that have technology bordering on magic? How many tyrannical countries do you know that make no mention of religious or ethnic purity? The people in the Capitol don't care about the size of Panem. It's not a source of pride for them. What they do care about is how much more advanced they are compared to the Districts. It's a colonialist attitude presented without the desire to expand or to uplift/convert/save/teach/whatever the savages.
Actually "news to me" was a joke.
Damn you, internet sarcasm! :fist shake:
And you just explained why they have the other districts, the people in Britain didn't care about the size of the empire, they cared about the things they got from them.
I'm not sure if everything the Districts made actually went back to the Capitol. Coal power, in particular, seems anachronistic given the Capitol's capabilities.
The economy of Panem is odd, too. The Districts - at least, District 12 - seem to operate on a capitalist/barter hybrid. There are 'rich' people like the Mayor and Peeta's family, but Katniss and Gale barter. Do we learn if the workers get any kind of wage or anything?
Maybe the missing backstory to district 13 would answer all those questions I feel. Each district is known for doing a thing. District 13 had a very special thing. The districts are probably more for control than they once were before the rebellions.
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
Why can't you just set a story in a post-apocalyptic ruins-of-the-US where the government is a fascist dystopia modelling itself on ancient Rome? I don't see why it's obligatory to provide an explanation for that.
Again, it needs to be said that the majority of Districts don't have any kind of leverage over the Capitol. The products they provide could easily be created/obtained through other means - robots, mutations, etc. Those Districts that do provide things that could be a threat to the Capitol are treated much more fairly.
My biggest issue with the setting is why the non-critical Districts exist at all. It's just mind-blowingly wasteful to keep whole towns of (for all intents and purposes) useless people around. The extra Peacekeepers, the extra surveillance... that's the part I have a problem with. Then again, since the Capitol is all about gross extravagance, it's not out of character for them/it.
By this logic why do we keep places like Iowa around when we can get our food cheaper in other places?
Because we're not a dystopia that views the people in those areas as nothing more than fodder for our gladiatorial games?
News to me.
But the point stands, why would a dystopia be more likely to not keep the place around than we are? If anything, they'd be more likely since characteristically countries like that hold on to size.
It's all just kind of a little too convenient for the narrative, don't you think though?
The Capitol is self-sufficient, but spends who knows how much money propping up the districts . . . for what? Continued humiliation? That's not how an economy works. We wouldn't spend 90% of our GDP on projects that served no other purpose than to make fun of, say, Mexico.
The whole story falls out like this. Every little question or discrepancy is answered by a convenience that ensures that things have to be the way the story dictates, regardless of whether or not it makes any rational kind of sense.
The Capitol has no apparent collective national agency beyond fucking over people for something that happened almost 100 years ago:
Why can't the Districts rebel? The Capitol has the technological advantage.
Why can't the Districts provide for themselves? The Capitol won't let them.
Why do the Games exist in the first place? To remind the Districts that they suck.
Why can't people leave the Districts? The Capitol wants to keep them penned in.
Why does the Capitol need these people? To provide labor for the resources the Capital uses.
But I thought the Capitol had magical engineering technology? They do, they just like to fuck with everyone else.
Matthew Ygelsias actually wrote a few pieces about the economics of the Hunger Games at slate.
I'm curious how they'll sell the second movie since on the surface it'll be very similar to the first.
I was extremely disappointed with that book.
Catching Fire spoilers:
With the 75th annual special rules, it was perfectly feasable to have Haymitch be the second person from District 12. That would have been a hell of a lot more interesting than just re-hashing the first games with a more gimmicky arena. Like, Haymitch would actually be useful in the arena, and Peeta would be awesome getting sponsors for them back at the Capitol. It's like good narrative was sacrificed for more crap teen romance, which, I suppose is defensible from an economic standpoint, but is pretty tedious.
Honestly they should make massive changes to both the second and third movie, if you ask me. Those books actually were a huge let-down.
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Again, it needs to be said that the majority of Districts don't have any kind of leverage over the Capitol. The products they provide could easily be created/obtained through other means - robots, mutations, etc. Those Districts that do provide things that could be a threat to the Capitol are treated much more fairly.
My biggest issue with the setting is why the non-critical Districts exist at all. It's just mind-blowingly wasteful to keep whole towns of (for all intents and purposes) useless people around. The extra Peacekeepers, the extra surveillance... that's the part I have a problem with. Then again, since the Capitol is all about gross extravagance, it's not out of character for them/it.
By this logic why do we keep places like Iowa around when we can get our food cheaper in other places?
Because we're not a dystopia that views the people in those areas as nothing more than fodder for our gladiatorial games?
News to me.
But the point stands, why would a dystopia be more likely to not keep the place around than we are? If anything, they'd be more likely since characteristically countries like that hold on to size.
It's all just kind of a little too convenient for the narrative, don't you think though?
The Capitol is self-sufficient, but spends who knows how much money propping up the districts . . . for what? Continued humiliation? That's not how an economy works. We wouldn't spend 90% of our GDP on projects that served no other purpose than to make fun of, say, Mexico.
The whole story falls out like this. Every little question or discrepancy is answered by a convenience that ensures that things have to be the way the story dictates, regardless of whether or not it makes any rational kind of sense.
The Capitol has no apparent collective national agency beyond fucking over people for something that happened almost 100 years ago:
Why can't the Districts rebel? The Capitol has the technological advantage.
Why can't the Districts provide for themselves? The Capitol won't let them.
Why do the Games exist in the first place? To remind the Districts that they suck.
Why can't people leave the Districts? The Capitol wants to keep them penned in.
Why does the Capitol need these people? To provide labor for the resources the Capital uses.
But I thought the Capitol had magical engineering technology? They do, they just like to fuck with everyone else.
Matthew Ygelsias actually wrote a few pieces about the economics of the Hunger Games at slate.
I never really thought about it, but yes, the economy and technological progress of the Capitol would almost assuredly be in complete stagnation. I hope they invented everything they ever needed before they took over the Districts.
Again, it needs to be said that the majority of Districts don't have any kind of leverage over the Capitol. The products they provide could easily be created/obtained through other means - robots, mutations, etc. Those Districts that do provide things that could be a threat to the Capitol are treated much more fairly.
My biggest issue with the setting is why the non-critical Districts exist at all. It's just mind-blowingly wasteful to keep whole towns of (for all intents and purposes) useless people around. The extra Peacekeepers, the extra surveillance... that's the part I have a problem with. Then again, since the Capitol is all about gross extravagance, it's not out of character for them/it.
By this logic why do we keep places like Iowa around when we can get our food cheaper in other places?
Because we're not a dystopia that views the people in those areas as nothing more than fodder for our gladiatorial games?
News to me.
But the point stands, why would a dystopia be more likely to not keep the place around than we are? If anything, they'd be more likely since characteristically countries like that hold on to size.
It's all just kind of a little too convenient for the narrative, don't you think though?
The Capitol is self-sufficient, but spends who knows how much money propping up the districts . . . for what? Continued humiliation? That's not how an economy works. We wouldn't spend 90% of our GDP on projects that served no other purpose than to make fun of, say, Mexico.
The whole story falls out like this. Every little question or discrepancy is answered by a convenience that ensures that things have to be the way the story dictates, regardless of whether or not it makes any rational kind of sense.
The Capitol has no apparent collective national agency beyond fucking over people for something that happened almost 100 years ago:
Why can't the Districts rebel? The Capitol has the technological advantage.
Why can't the Districts provide for themselves? The Capitol won't let them.
Why do the Games exist in the first place? To remind the Districts that they suck.
Why can't people leave the Districts? The Capitol wants to keep them penned in.
Why does the Capitol need these people? To provide labor for the resources the Capital uses.
But I thought the Capitol had magical engineering technology? They do, they just like to fuck with everyone else.
People are cheaper. That's why colonialism lasted well past the industrial revolution. The districts are also kept in line by the Capitol distributing everything centrally, so that individual districts can't even get their own products. There's also the monopoly issue, as only district eleven can produce grain, only district three can manufacture anything (chances are district three is similar to Detroit), and only district blah produces wood. That means that, while every district has enough of its specialty to supply all of Panem, no district is self sufficient due to having nothing else (three is especially snookered because it doesn't even have raw materiel not sent by the capitol). In many ways, it's similar to how Britain kept the American colonies in line by banning manufacturing, so that all raw materials had to be sent to the Isles to be made into anything.
Again, it needs to be said that the majority of Districts don't have any kind of leverage over the Capitol. The products they provide could easily be created/obtained through other means - robots, mutations, etc. Those Districts that do provide things that could be a threat to the Capitol are treated much more fairly.
My biggest issue with the setting is why the non-critical Districts exist at all. It's just mind-blowingly wasteful to keep whole towns of (for all intents and purposes) useless people around. The extra Peacekeepers, the extra surveillance... that's the part I have a problem with. Then again, since the Capitol is all about gross extravagance, it's not out of character for them/it.
By this logic why do we keep places like Iowa around when we can get our food cheaper in other places?
Because we're not a dystopia that views the people in those areas as nothing more than fodder for our gladiatorial games?
News to me.
Lemme guess... you're going to bring up either the military, our prison system, or both, right?
But the point stands, why would a dystopia be more likely to not keep the place around than we are? If anything, they'd be more likely since characteristically countries like that hold on to size.
How many tyrannical countries do you know that have technology bordering on magic? How many tyrannical countries do you know that make no mention of religious or ethnic purity? The people in the Capitol don't care about the size of Panem. It's not a source of pride for them. What they do care about is how much more advanced they are compared to the Districts. It's a colonialist attitude presented without the desire to expand or to uplift/convert/save/teach/whatever the savages.
Actually "news to me" was a joke.
Damn you, internet sarcasm! :fist shake:
And you just explained why they have the other districts, the people in Britain didn't care about the size of the empire, they cared about the things they got from them.
I'm not sure if everything the Districts made actually went back to the Capitol. Coal power, in particular, seems anachronistic given the Capitol's capabilities.
The economy of Panem is odd, too. The Districts - at least, District 12 - seem to operate on a capitalist/barter hybrid. There are 'rich' people like the Mayor and Peeta's family, but Katniss and Gale barter. Do we learn if the workers get any kind of wage or anything?
It seems like the Capitol uses electric everything. Without the internal combustion engine, oil as a the dominant power source would be replaced by our dominant source of electricity: coal. This is especially likely given that the main drawbacks of coal are that it's dirty and that it's labour intensive. I'm pretty sure the Capitol doesn't care about wastefulness, and it sure as hell doesn't care about worker conditions.
For the economic system, it seems like women don't work, so I think everything is based on using the marginal product women produce in small yard gardens and the products of old, retired men. Note that we don't see very many male characters during work hours, so it's likely that not even the baker avoids the mines. Add in the fact that administrators and peacekeepers seem to get a generous income and that you can double your family income by having your kid enter his name once extra, and you have a side economy.
Alternately, the Capitol simply blocks the large scale production of food (and takes all the food from 11) and only gives food to those who work in the mines (or wherever). While a few people have the skills needed so that they can live off just earning the side products of the entire district (so that the baker gets much his protein from Katniss' squirrels because he doesn't get anything from the Capitol), there's only so much side income to go around, keeping the artisan population small.
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
Again, it needs to be said that the majority of Districts don't have any kind of leverage over the Capitol. The products they provide could easily be created/obtained through other means - robots, mutations, etc. Those Districts that do provide things that could be a threat to the Capitol are treated much more fairly.
My biggest issue with the setting is why the non-critical Districts exist at all. It's just mind-blowingly wasteful to keep whole towns of (for all intents and purposes) useless people around. The extra Peacekeepers, the extra surveillance... that's the part I have a problem with. Then again, since the Capitol is all about gross extravagance, it's not out of character for them/it.
By this logic why do we keep places like Iowa around when we can get our food cheaper in other places?
Because we're not a dystopia that views the people in those areas as nothing more than fodder for our gladiatorial games?
News to me.
But the point stands, why would a dystopia be more likely to not keep the place around than we are? If anything, they'd be more likely since characteristically countries like that hold on to size.
It's all just kind of a little too convenient for the narrative, don't you think though?
The Capitol is self-sufficient, but spends who knows how much money propping up the districts . . . for what? Continued humiliation? That's not how an economy works. We wouldn't spend 90% of our GDP on projects that served no other purpose than to make fun of, say, Mexico.
The whole story falls out like this. Every little question or discrepancy is answered by a convenience that ensures that things have to be the way the story dictates, regardless of whether or not it makes any rational kind of sense.
The Capitol has no apparent collective national agency beyond fucking over people for something that happened almost 100 years ago:
Why can't the Districts rebel? The Capitol has the technological advantage.
Why can't the Districts provide for themselves? The Capitol won't let them.
Why do the Games exist in the first place? To remind the Districts that they suck.
Why can't people leave the Districts? The Capitol wants to keep them penned in.
Why does the Capitol need these people? To provide labor for the resources the Capital uses.
But I thought the Capitol had magical engineering technology? They do, they just like to fuck with everyone else.
People are cheaper. That's why colonialism lasted well past the industrial revolution. The districts are also kept in line by the Capitol distributing everything centrally, so that individual districts can't even get their own products. There's also the monopoly issue, as only district eleven can produce grain, only district three can manufacture anything (chances are district three is similar to Detroit), and only district blah produces wood. That means that, while every district has enough of its specialty to supply all of Panem, no district is self sufficient due to having nothing else (three is especially snookered because it doesn't even have raw materiel not sent by the capitol). In many ways, it's similar to how Britain kept the American colonies in line by banning manufacturing, so that all raw materials had to be sent to the Isles to be made into anything.
I think confusion lies within the question of "who is producing what for whom?"
If the Capitol needs those products, then the Districts have political leverage over them.
If the Capitol doesn't need those products, then they're spending a lot of money to support an economy they don't need.
Plus, their ability to easily engineer organic goods presupposes an lack of demand for certain products.
0
Options
KetarCome on upstairswe're having a partyRegistered Userregular
Was the subplot about Peeta selling her out to the D1/D2 kids ever resolved? It just seemed like Peeta disappeared from the story for a while after forming an alliance with the douchekids, and then is suddenly found injured, wherein Katniss forgets to ever bring up the fact that he tried to get her killed.
The first time you see Peeta with the careers he's leading them the wrong way, telling them she went in a direction she did not. When they have her trapped in a tree, he buys her time by convincing them to wait her out. After the trackerjacker nest gets dropped and she's wandering around hallucinating, he's the first one back to her, screaming at her to run. He and Cato clearly have a confrontation off-screen leading to his wounded leg and hiding in the stream. Prior to the Games beginning he goes out of his way to make her be seen more favorably during his interviews to increase her chances at sponsorship and winning. When they're on their podiums waiting for the start and she's eying that bow, he catches her eye and indicates that she needs to let it go and get out of there as Haymitch had advised, knowing the cornucopia will be an utter bloodbath.
How exactly did you ever believe that he had actually sold her out?
To be fair to Ross with regard to this specific observation, this is supposed to be a wtf moment, both in the books and the film. Particularly in te book, Peeta is described as being relatively weak with no particular skill at anything except makeup/art. So it is a bit surprising when he shows up allied with the career tributes.
Remember, at some point he refused to continue training with Katniss. Katniss doesn't know why, and neither do we - not right away. Also - and please correct me if I'm wrong here - doesn't Katniss (in the book) contemplate whether or not Peeta actually cares or is just trying to convince her out getting a weapon for herself that might eventually deplete his own survival odds?
In both the film and the book, she still walks toward te cornucopia. She hesitates - and that hesitation makes all the difference - but she doesn't readily accept Peeta's suggestion. The why of this isn't as apparent in the film, but those who did not read the book might draw the conclusion that Peeta is working for himself at that point. I don't think it is explicitly cemented at the point in time that Ross suggests that Peeta is only looking out for Katniss. We don't really get any confirmation until Peeta tells Katniss to run.
I can understand some doubt when reading the book, given Katniss's own thoughts that are conveyed to the reader. I just can't see anyone used to watching film with a critical eye not seeing through the deception in the film though, particularly since the film never even tries to sell it the way the book does.
My litmus test though, is my wife, who saw the movie with me on Monday and has never read the books. After Peeta first showed up with the careers she started to ask a question, stopped herself, and just said, "Oh, he's leading them away from her, isn't he?" in a very rhetorical manner.
You're assuming that the Capitol doesn't micromanage each district and uses some sort of senate type system that can leverage demands against the Capitol, Atomic Ross? I don't think there's any dialog. Similar to how colonial powers used labor to keep colonies (not America) under their control.
Having not read the books:
I think the series is an allegory of the wealthy elite and will touch upon similarities to the American Revolution, or other colonial type rebellions. It certainly strikes me as a very 13 Colonies vs Britain appeal in the basic story.
not a doctor, not a lawyer, examples I use may not be fully researched so don't take out of context plz, don't @ me
0
Options
KlykaDO you have anySPARE BATTERIES?Registered Userregular
So are we saying that the advanced technology used in this movie runs on coal?
Again, it needs to be said that the majority of Districts don't have any kind of leverage over the Capitol. The products they provide could easily be created/obtained through other means - robots, mutations, etc. Those Districts that do provide things that could be a threat to the Capitol are treated much more fairly.
My biggest issue with the setting is why the non-critical Districts exist at all. It's just mind-blowingly wasteful to keep whole towns of (for all intents and purposes) useless people around. The extra Peacekeepers, the extra surveillance... that's the part I have a problem with. Then again, since the Capitol is all about gross extravagance, it's not out of character for them/it.
By this logic why do we keep places like Iowa around when we can get our food cheaper in other places?
Because we're not a dystopia that views the people in those areas as nothing more than fodder for our gladiatorial games?
News to me.
But the point stands, why would a dystopia be more likely to not keep the place around than we are? If anything, they'd be more likely since characteristically countries like that hold on to size.
It's all just kind of a little too convenient for the narrative, don't you think though?
The Capitol is self-sufficient, but spends who knows how much money propping up the districts . . . for what? Continued humiliation? That's not how an economy works. We wouldn't spend 90% of our GDP on projects that served no other purpose than to make fun of, say, Mexico.
The whole story falls out like this. Every little question or discrepancy is answered by a convenience that ensures that things have to be the way the story dictates, regardless of whether or not it makes any rational kind of sense.
The Capitol has no apparent collective national agency beyond fucking over people for something that happened almost 100 years ago:
Why can't the Districts rebel? The Capitol has the technological advantage.
Why can't the Districts provide for themselves? The Capitol won't let them.
Why do the Games exist in the first place? To remind the Districts that they suck.
Why can't people leave the Districts? The Capitol wants to keep them penned in.
Why does the Capitol need these people? To provide labor for the resources the Capital uses.
But I thought the Capitol had magical engineering technology? They do, they just like to fuck with everyone else.
People are cheaper. That's why colonialism lasted well past the industrial revolution. The districts are also kept in line by the Capitol distributing everything centrally, so that individual districts can't even get their own products. There's also the monopoly issue, as only district eleven can produce grain, only district three can manufacture anything (chances are district three is similar to Detroit), and only district blah produces wood. That means that, while every district has enough of its specialty to supply all of Panem, no district is self sufficient due to having nothing else (three is especially snookered because it doesn't even have raw materiel not sent by the capitol). In many ways, it's similar to how Britain kept the American colonies in line by banning manufacturing, so that all raw materials had to be sent to the Isles to be made into anything.
I think confusion lies within the question of "who is producing what for whom?"
If the Capitol needs those products, then the Districts have political leverage over them.
If the Capitol doesn't need those products, then they're spending a lot of money to support an economy they don't need.
Plus, their ability to easily engineer organic goods presupposes an lack of demand for certain products.
We can and do engineer organic goods today. It's just expensive, which is why we don't use them regularly outside of entertainment and research.
Honestly, if you think that an area producing something another area needs is enough to stop the later from abusing the former, I have no idea how you passed world history. Seriously, what do you think colonies were for? Hell, you just described the formation of the ancient Egyptian government, which was based purely on a small elite exploiting a captive population. In the case of Egypt, the population was held in place by geography (the Nile runs through a desert) and rebellions were put down by a conscript army from the oppressed areas. The Capitol has electric fences and NUKES. The can turn any unruly district into glass and make up for the loss by making a new district population out of one eleventh of every other district population.
Again, it needs to be said that the majority of Districts don't have any kind of leverage over the Capitol. The products they provide could easily be created/obtained through other means - robots, mutations, etc. Those Districts that do provide things that could be a threat to the Capitol are treated much more fairly.
My biggest issue with the setting is why the non-critical Districts exist at all. It's just mind-blowingly wasteful to keep whole towns of (for all intents and purposes) useless people around. The extra Peacekeepers, the extra surveillance... that's the part I have a problem with. Then again, since the Capitol is all about gross extravagance, it's not out of character for them/it.
By this logic why do we keep places like Iowa around when we can get our food cheaper in other places?
Because we're not a dystopia that views the people in those areas as nothing more than fodder for our gladiatorial games?
News to me.
But the point stands, why would a dystopia be more likely to not keep the place around than we are? If anything, they'd be more likely since characteristically countries like that hold on to size.
It's all just kind of a little too convenient for the narrative, don't you think though?
The Capitol is self-sufficient, but spends who knows how much money propping up the districts . . . for what? Continued humiliation? That's not how an economy works. We wouldn't spend 90% of our GDP on projects that served no other purpose than to make fun of, say, Mexico.
The whole story falls out like this. Every little question or discrepancy is answered by a convenience that ensures that things have to be the way the story dictates, regardless of whether or not it makes any rational kind of sense.
The Capitol has no apparent collective national agency beyond fucking over people for something that happened almost 100 years ago:
Why can't the Districts rebel? The Capitol has the technological advantage.
Why can't the Districts provide for themselves? The Capitol won't let them.
Why do the Games exist in the first place? To remind the Districts that they suck.
Why can't people leave the Districts? The Capitol wants to keep them penned in.
Why does the Capitol need these people? To provide labor for the resources the Capital uses.
But I thought the Capitol had magical engineering technology? They do, they just like to fuck with everyone else.
People are cheaper. That's why colonialism lasted well past the industrial revolution. The districts are also kept in line by the Capitol distributing everything centrally, so that individual districts can't even get their own products. There's also the monopoly issue, as only district eleven can produce grain, only district three can manufacture anything (chances are district three is similar to Detroit), and only district blah produces wood. That means that, while every district has enough of its specialty to supply all of Panem, no district is self sufficient due to having nothing else (three is especially snookered because it doesn't even have raw materiel not sent by the capitol). In many ways, it's similar to how Britain kept the American colonies in line by banning manufacturing, so that all raw materials had to be sent to the Isles to be made into anything.
I think confusion lies within the question of "who is producing what for whom?"
If the Capitol needs those products, then the Districts have political leverage over them..
Even if they need the products, they can always just replace the people.
I think confusion lies within the question of "who is producing what for whom?"
If the Capitol needs those products, then the Districts have political leverage over them.
If the Capitol doesn't need those products, then they're spending a lot of money to support an economy they don't need.
Plus, their ability to easily engineer organic goods presupposes an lack of demand for certain products.
I have neither seen the film nor read the books, so the whole question whether they're any good isn't one I can address - but according to the conversation so far, if the Capitol needs what is produced by the Districts, that doesn't automatically give the latter political leverage. The colonial powers needed (at least in order to be economically powerful) what came out of the colonies, but this didn't really give the colonies much in the way of leverage. That sort of exploitation is still happening, and it goes hand in hand with some pretty atrocious violations of human rights. Is there a reason why the same couldn't be true for the Capitol and Districts?
Of course what I've just said may well be rendered irrelevant by my not having seen or read The Hunger Games, in which case please ignore.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
0
Options
KlykaDO you have anySPARE BATTERIES?Registered Userregular
Posts
So "It happened" is a shitty explanation but "Magic" is a fully acceptable one? Great. It happened because Magic. Done and done.
edit: remember, she got a higher score than anyone else in the games, so they had her marked as a target right from the start.
3DS: 1607-3034-6970
Real murders? Not so much.
Rue didn't take the spear for her. The dude missed Katniss and killed Rue. Katniss, reacting to his attack, pulls her bow out and kills him.
At this point, I am pretty sure, at least in the books, The Capital is an allegory for the %1 of America, they live in opulence while the various Districts live in different levels of squalor and are the 99%, the police/military being among the most privileged of the oppressed when they should join with the other Districts against The Capital. Many barely have access to basic medical services due to lack of insurance and yet America has some of the most advanced medical services in the world if you have the means. America, how does it work? Why don't people rebel? Oh wait, they do in some places, yet things keep on keeping on. It really is America taken to an extreme post apocalyptic future where the 1% win, again. Feudalism 2.0 Fallout's Enclave winning and so forth.
Plus the 1% have figured out a way to keep the 99% from even seeing how well the 1% have it. And to barricade themselves so far away from the 99% that they never have to deal with them.
So I take it that you don't believe in the Belgian Congo? I mean, twentieth century Belgian culture was based on chopping the hands off small children, and it wasn't until the 1960's that the Congo was able to gain independence, at which point Belgium conspired to have the Congo destroyed by civil war.
minor spoiler from the books, probably safe to read if you are only familiar with the story from the first book.
What?
Don't forget geographic advantages of only being accessible via a single, miles long tunnel. Hell, the main reason Ethiopia avoided being conquered by Europe was the fact that it's a plateau (and Italy called dibs, which removed all effective threats).
The best image I can come up with is the size of England versus all the shit it got up to. Hell, it was probably the least interventionist of the colonial powers. The Capitol is likely closer to France, Spain, or, god help the districts, Belgium. Not only are there various ways of blocking the unity of the districts (nothing as clever as the way Britain kept the Tutsis and Hutus at odds, but still), but is also careful to make sure each district has a monopoly on each of the necessities of any sort of military. For example, District 3 can manufacture weapons, but has no fuel or provisions.
Every male in the Congo over walking age was expected to meet a barely possible quota every week (what it was a quota of varied by district), with the punishment for a slow week being one's right hand. Given that variation over time exists, most workers make do with one hand by retirement age. No, I don't know how they didn't run out of people. Apparently, though, the guy who set this system up, Leopold II, is now known as "The Builder King" because he used the proceeds to build a shitton of monuments before his atrocities were uncovered and the operation... nationalized. Looks like the Belgian people wanted a piece of that hot hand action.
Meanwhile, Germany was perfecting its genocide techniques by forcing uncooperative tribes into the desert and fencing them in to die, and Great Britain was inventing the concentration camp.
Children, adults, whoever had a had and didn't have the strength to keep it away from the hand bandits. History's a helluva thing.
The first time you see Peeta with the careers he's leading them the wrong way, telling them she went in a direction she did not. When they have her trapped in a tree, he buys her time by convincing them to wait her out. After the trackerjacker nest gets dropped and she's wandering around hallucinating, he's the first one back to her, screaming at her to run. He and Cato clearly have a confrontation off-screen leading to his wounded leg and hiding in the stream. Prior to the Games beginning he goes out of his way to make her be seen more favorably during his interviews to increase her chances at sponsorship and winning. When they're on their podiums waiting for the start and she's eying that bow, he catches her eye and indicates that she needs to let it go and get out of there as Haymitch had advised, knowing the cornucopia will be an utter bloodbath.
How exactly did you ever believe that he had actually sold her out?
My biggest issue with the setting is why the non-critical Districts exist at all. It's just mind-blowingly wasteful to keep whole towns of (for all intents and purposes) useless people around. The extra Peacekeepers, the extra surveillance... that's the part I have a problem with. Then again, since the Capitol is all about gross extravagance, it's not out of character for them/it.
As far as the setting goes, here's my understanding of it (from the books... haven't seen the movie):
---
The US (and, presumably, the world, since the US falling wouldn't just happen) fell into chaos.
Out of that chaos, Panem emerged.
The Capitol was founded (presumably) by the winners of the post-apocalyptic power struggle. The Districts were made up of the losers.
After some time, the Districts decide to rebel.
The Capitol squashes the rebellion by wiping District 13 - the most powerful District and leader of the rebellion - off the map.
The other Districts, broken by the fact that the best of them was utterly destroyed, surrender.
The Capitol takes steps to ensure that rebellion won't happen again - electric fences around each District, extra security, extra surveillance, tightly controlled food rationing, constant pro-Capitol propaganda, swift and brutal punishment against any transgression, and, of course, the Hunger Games.
The people of the Districts eventually accept it all as facets of their lives. Most tend to hate the Games, but they feel powerless to fight against them and the Capitol.
---
I don't feel that the first three statements need to be fleshed out in order to make the story (which is about Katniss struggling against that backdrop) better. Katniss and the Games are so far removed from that, it hardly matters.
To be fair to Ross with regard to this specific observation, this is supposed to be a wtf moment, both in the books and the film. Particularly in te book, Peeta is described as being relatively weak with no particular skill at anything except makeup/art. So it is a bit surprising when he shows up allied with the career tributes.
Remember, at some point he refused to continue training with Katniss. Katniss doesn't know why, and neither do we - not right away. Also - and please correct me if I'm wrong here - doesn't Katniss (in the book) contemplate whether or not Peeta actually cares or is just trying to convince her out getting a weapon for herself that might eventually deplete his own survival odds?
In both the film and the book, she still walks toward te cornucopia. She hesitates - and that hesitation makes all the difference - but she doesn't readily accept Peeta's suggestion. The why of this isn't as apparent in the film, but those who did not read the book might draw the conclusion that Peeta is working for himself at that point. I don't think it is explicitly cemented at the point in time that Ross suggests that Peeta is only looking out for Katniss. We don't really get any confirmation until Peeta tells Katniss to run.
By this logic why do we keep places like Iowa around when we can get our food cheaper in other places?
Because we're not a dystopia that views the people in those areas as nothing more than fodder for our gladiatorial games?
Katniss and Gale talk back and forth about hunting and living in the woods, explaining their squalor, which is touched upon a few times with food shipments, coal mining, and so on. I thought I remember Haymitch mentioning that the district that wins is often gifted more food and such. They also touch on what is probably explained better in the books with entering your name multiple times to get more supplies, which is fine, it's basically a lottery to them.
There are hints of district 13's demise here and there. This becomes critical in the next movies.
District 11's rebellion for the hunger games after Rue's death (which is different from the book?), which was quickly put down I think?
The hunger games were explained to be a way to give districts pride and opulence, in response for not rebelling. It works exactly like propaganda with entertainment. Propaganda is a powerful thing.
News to me.
But the point stands, why would a dystopia be more likely to not keep the place around than we are? If anything, they'd be more likely since characteristically countries like that hold on to size.
Lemme guess... you're going to bring up either the military, our prison system, or both, right?
How many tyrannical countries do you know that have technology bordering on magic? How many tyrannical countries do you know that make no mention of religious or ethnic purity? The people in the Capitol don't care about the size of Panem. It's not a source of pride for them. What they do care about is how much more advanced they are compared to the Districts. It's a colonialist attitude presented without the desire to expand or to uplift/convert/save/teach/whatever the savages.
Actually "news to me" was a joke.
And you just explained why they have the other districts, the people in Britain didn't care about the size of the empire, they cared about the things they got from them.
It's all just kind of a little too convenient for the narrative, don't you think though?
The Capitol is self-sufficient, but spends who knows how much money propping up the districts . . . for what? Continued humiliation? That's not how an economy works. We wouldn't spend 90% of our GDP on projects that served no other purpose than to make fun of, say, Mexico.
The whole story falls out like this. Every little question or discrepancy is answered by a convenience that ensures that things have to be the way the story dictates, regardless of whether or not it makes any rational kind of sense.
The Capitol has no apparent collective national agency beyond fucking over people for something that happened almost 100 years ago:
Why can't the Districts rebel? The Capitol has the technological advantage.
Why can't the Districts provide for themselves? The Capitol won't let them.
Why do the Games exist in the first place? To remind the Districts that they suck.
Why can't people leave the Districts? The Capitol wants to keep them penned in.
Why does the Capitol need these people? To provide labor for the resources the Capital uses.
But I thought the Capitol had magical engineering technology? They do, they just like to fuck with everyone else.
Damn you, internet sarcasm! :fist shake:
I'm not sure if everything the Districts made actually went back to the Capitol. Coal power, in particular, seems anachronistic given the Capitol's capabilities.
The economy of Panem is odd, too. The Districts - at least, District 12 - seem to operate on a capitalist/barter hybrid. There are 'rich' people like the Mayor and Peeta's family, but Katniss and Gale barter. Do we learn if the workers get any kind of wage or anything?
It's like Fallout: New Vegas never happened.
Matthew Ygelsias actually wrote a few pieces about the economics of the Hunger Games at slate.
http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2012/03/the_hunger_games_could_a_real_country_have_an_economy_like_panem_s_.html
http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2012/03/25/district_12_s_amazing_coal_mining_productivity.html
Krugman wrote one too, apparently.
I was extremely disappointed with that book.
Catching Fire spoilers:
Honestly they should make massive changes to both the second and third movie, if you ask me. Those books actually were a huge let-down.
I never really thought about it, but yes, the economy and technological progress of the Capitol would almost assuredly be in complete stagnation. I hope they invented everything they ever needed before they took over the Districts.
People are cheaper. That's why colonialism lasted well past the industrial revolution. The districts are also kept in line by the Capitol distributing everything centrally, so that individual districts can't even get their own products. There's also the monopoly issue, as only district eleven can produce grain, only district three can manufacture anything (chances are district three is similar to Detroit), and only district blah produces wood. That means that, while every district has enough of its specialty to supply all of Panem, no district is self sufficient due to having nothing else (three is especially snookered because it doesn't even have raw materiel not sent by the capitol). In many ways, it's similar to how Britain kept the American colonies in line by banning manufacturing, so that all raw materials had to be sent to the Isles to be made into anything.
It seems like the Capitol uses electric everything. Without the internal combustion engine, oil as a the dominant power source would be replaced by our dominant source of electricity: coal. This is especially likely given that the main drawbacks of coal are that it's dirty and that it's labour intensive. I'm pretty sure the Capitol doesn't care about wastefulness, and it sure as hell doesn't care about worker conditions.
For the economic system, it seems like women don't work, so I think everything is based on using the marginal product women produce in small yard gardens and the products of old, retired men. Note that we don't see very many male characters during work hours, so it's likely that not even the baker avoids the mines. Add in the fact that administrators and peacekeepers seem to get a generous income and that you can double your family income by having your kid enter his name once extra, and you have a side economy.
Alternately, the Capitol simply blocks the large scale production of food (and takes all the food from 11) and only gives food to those who work in the mines (or wherever). While a few people have the skills needed so that they can live off just earning the side products of the entire district (so that the baker gets much his protein from Katniss' squirrels because he doesn't get anything from the Capitol), there's only so much side income to go around, keeping the artisan population small.
I think confusion lies within the question of "who is producing what for whom?"
If the Capitol needs those products, then the Districts have political leverage over them.
If the Capitol doesn't need those products, then they're spending a lot of money to support an economy they don't need.
Plus, their ability to easily engineer organic goods presupposes an lack of demand for certain products.
I can understand some doubt when reading the book, given Katniss's own thoughts that are conveyed to the reader. I just can't see anyone used to watching film with a critical eye not seeing through the deception in the film though, particularly since the film never even tries to sell it the way the book does.
My litmus test though, is my wife, who saw the movie with me on Monday and has never read the books. After Peeta first showed up with the careers she started to ask a question, stopped herself, and just said, "Oh, he's leading them away from her, isn't he?" in a very rhetorical manner.
Having not read the books:
We can and do engineer organic goods today. It's just expensive, which is why we don't use them regularly outside of entertainment and research.
Honestly, if you think that an area producing something another area needs is enough to stop the later from abusing the former, I have no idea how you passed world history. Seriously, what do you think colonies were for? Hell, you just described the formation of the ancient Egyptian government, which was based purely on a small elite exploiting a captive population. In the case of Egypt, the population was held in place by geography (the Nile runs through a desert) and rebellions were put down by a conscript army from the oppressed areas. The Capitol has electric fences and NUKES. The can turn any unruly district into glass and make up for the loss by making a new district population out of one eleventh of every other district population.
Ours does. Where do you think our power comes from? Solar?
Even if they need the products, they can always just replace the people.
Of course what I've just said may well be rendered irrelevant by my not having seen or read The Hunger Games, in which case please ignore.
"Nothing is gonna save us forever but a lot of things can save us today." - Night in the Woods
Aren't they using some kind of crazy space magic technology? Or is it all normal tech you can just run on normal electricity?