PDA

View Full Version : The Hunger Games



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 [24] 25 26 27 28 29 30

Buzz
04-12-2012, 11:20 PM
Well another name being tossed around is Arnie Hammer.
http://www.aceshowbiz.com/news/view/00048737.html

michiruwater
04-12-2012, 11:50 PM
I think Hammer would be a great choice. Athletic, very handsome, and a good actor to boot, plus he's the right age.

I hope we find out soon :shuffle:

Buzz
04-13-2012, 12:52 AM
I think Hammer would be a great choice. Athletic, very handsome, and a good actor to boot, plus he's the right age.

I hope we find out soon :shuffle:

If good vibes count for anything I will be sending tons to Hammer and hope he gets the role. :respec:

Jimena
04-13-2012, 02:06 AM
What about Johanna? Kristen Bell said she was interested and I think she would do well with the role.

gingercrush
04-13-2012, 02:14 AM
I have just completed the three books. I have mixed opinions about them. In regards to the films. I'll wait for them on DVD.

The first book was okay. I guess having already read and watched Battle Royale I wanted something immensely more violent. I really liked the mutations right at the end of the games and thus was confused when Catching Fire veered in a totally different direction. Catching Fire was utterly boring till the hunger games and I hated the ending and it didn't feel real. Mockinjay was well boring. Yes I had to finish the book but suddenly Gale is in every chapter and Katniss just gets knocked out so many times.

The books are good but not great. And now I should go searching for Hunger Games fanfiction that does some really good gory hunger games. I know that seems petty for me to just have a thirst for violence. But hunger games was outdone by Battle Royale who arguably had a better game and romance but lacked the world building and overthrowing of a government. Hunger games does those way better but mucks up the romance and delivers a PG-13 (which I guess is appropriate) game. Meanwhile the dystopic world has been done over and over again by so many books and so many authors. They've done it better too.

That is how I see The Hunger Games. An average book series that somehow has captured the imagination of many. One can't help but come to that realisation that just as the citizens of the capital in Panem have been manipulated all their lives. The mass media of the 21st century have clearly manipulated us into devouring this franchise.

michiruwater
04-13-2012, 04:29 AM
Or some people just genuinely like them, even understanding that the series definitely has faults.

I've seen Battle Royale. I saw it years and years ago. I vastly prefer Hunger Games. Battle Royale had a less understandable plot (I never understood how the BR Act was supposed to entice students to actually go to school - wouldn't you just skip all the time if there was a chance your class would end up participating in the games??) and the gore and violence was really unbelievable. I agree the romance was way better, but the romance is waaaay less important in THG than in BR.

Anyway, yeah, THG is not Narnia or Prydain or even Harry Potter in quality. I still genuinely liked it anyway, no hype necessary, and I read it well before the hype became nuts (which I feel happened overnight sometime last fall - I still have no idea when it suddenly became massively huge).

gingercrush
04-13-2012, 04:40 AM
I've seen Battle Royale. I saw it years and years ago. I vastly prefer Hunger Games. Battle Royale had a less understandable plot (I never understood how the BR Act was supposed to entice students to actually go to school - wouldn't you just skip all the time if there was a chance your class would end up participating in the games??) and the gore and violence was really unbelievable. I agree the romance was way better, but the romance is waaaay less important in THG than in BR.

Anyway, yeah, THG is not Narnia or Prydain or even Harry Potter in quality. I still genuinely liked it anyway, no hype necessary, and I read it well before the hype became nuts (which I feel happened overnight sometime last fall - I still have no idea when it suddenly became massively huge).

Battle Royale has plenty of flaws and the film differs quite a bit from the book. I found the book better but if you're like me and you're okay with visceral violence then the film is great.

I think people always saw the potential of the Hunger games and you wonder as Twilight was ending Hunger games came at the right time. And from there is just built and built.

Bostonfan
04-13-2012, 02:16 PM
OK, I just finished the 3rd book last night. I'm in the "meh" category. But I did feel compelled to finish the trilogy. One question for the HG fans (spoiler for those that haven't read the books): When the remaining victors are voting on whether or not the Capitol children should be thrown into a Hunger Games, is Katniss vote "yes - for Prim" a calculated response to keep Coin pacified because she had resolved to kill Coin? Likewise I couldn't decide if Haymitch decided to vote with her was because he knew she had something up her sleeve and trusted whatever she was planning to do.

I will say Haymitch was my favorite character through the trilogy.

danceronice
04-13-2012, 02:58 PM
There's a whole (unspoilered) discussion of your spoiler questoin back a few pages here. Personally I don't think there's any evidence Katniss decided to kill Coin until the instant before she does it (when she's aiming at Snow and realises that he's telling the truth, and implied that HE'S no longer the one who's putting innocent lives at risk to further his agenda). Her options when voting here vote no and piss off Coin, vote yes and temporarily keep Coin happy, but either way it doesn't matter as Coin's just show the rebellion is no better than the Capitol simply by proposing these games.

Buzz
04-13-2012, 08:52 PM
Never heard of Battle Royale until this thread. LOL. I understand the criticism of the books. While I absolutely love the first book; I do have my problems with the other two but not with the ending however. That I love. :D.

Lesmiserable
04-14-2012, 12:40 AM
Hi, this is my first post in this forum, even though I've been lurking around for ages.......

I just want to join the discussion on Battle Royale and The Hunger Games. I, for one, had never heard of Battle Royale until recently and I'd lived in Japan and had always been a fan of Japanese manga (I had no excuse for not knowing), so it's hardly surprising that Collins didn't know of this book. Having read both books back-to-back last month for my book club, I have to say I think The Hunger Games is vastly better in every single way (except for depiction of violence). For me, Battle Royale lacks a mature, convincing plot. The battle royale act never makes any logical sense in the first place--what could any government gain from going through elaborate, extreme measures to set up a secret battle gound for high school students to kill each other? There's never any legit explanation to that except for the lame " for military research purpose." I couldn't really take the book seriously as a result. In The Hunger Games, on the other hand, the games at least serves a convincing political purpose. The characters in THG are also much more interesting and multi-dimensional.

I guess I'm also amongst the minority of readers who actually like both CF and Mockingjay better than the first book. I like that Collins kept the darker tone of the story consistent through out while still allowing a little bit of hope and romance in the end. My only problem with Mockingjay is that the ending feels a bit too rushed and truncated (although I do like the epilogue). I have the same complain for the movie too--so much is left out! Did they show Peeta's leg injury by the mutts?

Regarding Katniss' vote in MJ, my impression while reading the part was that it's deliberate and that her subsequent action was planned--she said "for Prim" and Prim would never have agreed to it. I think Haymitch siding with Katniss also supports this theory. :slinkaway

Buzz
04-14-2012, 01:07 AM
Welcome to the forum Lesmiserable!

Artemis@BC
04-16-2012, 09:30 PM
I finally saw the film last night. I'm a bit crowd-phobic, so waited til a good 3 weeks after the film opened ... and a Canucks game night to boot.

Anyway, I went in with fairly high expectations ... and was not disappointed in the least. Yes, there are some details that by necessity get left out of a film adaptation of a novel, but that's just the way it goes unless you make it a 12-hour mini-series. And the choices and changes they made were, for the most part, entirely appropriate. And in some instances, improvements on the book. Particularly those relating to cutting down the endless exposition in all 3 books. And the flashback of Peeta giving the bread to Katniss -- stringing it out the way they did was excellent.

About the only thing that disappointed me was the "on fire" outfits at the parade of tributed. I expected more, somehow. But that's such a tiny detail, I'm willing to overlook it.

One question, though, about the riot in District 11 after Rue dies: I don't remember that happening in book 1, I thought that their response was to send the bread (which would have hard to work cinematically with a lot of explanation, so I'm perfectly okay with that being left out of the film), and then the riots started later, during their victory tour. But I could be mis-remembering -- not about the bread, I know that part, but about when exactly the riots started. Anyone?

danceronice
04-16-2012, 10:35 PM
About the only thing that disappointed me was the "on fire" outfits at the parade of tributed. I expected more, somehow. But that's such a tiny detail, I'm willing to overlook it.

It occurred to me, besides the scene being CGI-heavy (which makes everything look fake), I was wondering--because this is specifically "fake" fire, and they had a scene coming up that was supposed to be very real threatening fire (the forest fire in the Arena) maybe the 'fake' factor in the parade was somewhat deliberate.


One question, though, about the riot in District 11 after Rue dies: I don't remember that happening in book 1, I thought that their response was to send the bread (which would have hard to work cinematically with a lot of explanation, so I'm perfectly okay with that being left out of the film), and then the riots started later, during their victory tour. But I could be mis-remembering -- not about the bread, I know that part, but about when exactly the riots started. Anyone?

There isn't a riot in 11 in the book, at least not that Katniss knows about (and since it's first person we really don't get to see/hear anything she doesn't.) In fact there isn't a riot in 11 on the Victory tour--one man starts the 'mockingjay' call and Katniss sees him executed for it as they're being lead off the platform, and hears a few more shots. It's 8 that starts the full-on rioting after the tour. They did send her the bread--Katniss thinks that they had probably meant it for Rue and then opted to have Haymitch give it to her when Rue dies. In the book that's when she gives the 12 mourning/parting gesture to the camera and says thank to the people of District 11. But since they cut the scene earlier where Peeta explains all the different District styles of bread, it would have been a little more awkward to explain.

Rogue
04-16-2012, 10:38 PM
You are correct - there were no riots in District 11 mentioned in the Hunger Games book, although there was one mentioned in Catching Fire.

I can understand scenes getting left out of the movie, but I wonder why scenes that weren't in a book get added to a movie, or totally changed around. HP's fight with LV is an example - it went from being in the Great Hall with others around to being outside with no witnesses. What was the point in that change?