It’s not that the movie doesn’t have exactly what’s in the book. It’s that the movie is so ham-fisted, heavy-handed “it is bad when kids are killing kids” (duh?) morality play with the only hint of subtlety (just a hint, mind) in the “love” story between Katniss and Peeta - is she pretending, and if so, how much - but even that has to be driven home with the “You call that a kiss?” note (yes, it was in the book as well, so I guess they had to do it).
The book is a little more psychological, delving more into Katniss’s motivations, both in general and in tactical matters in the game itself.
That’s fine, and that’s why I want to read the books. Books are ALWAYS (well, almost always*) better at giving details and subtle psychological events. The movie did its job well enough. To put down the movie to that extent is putting down the people who like the movie without having read the books. We are dummies because we liked something that doesn’t get across every tiny little detail that obnoxious book readers think it should? That’s where it gets obnoxious, not the disappointment that your favorite little details were left out of the movie.
Hunger Games fans have a long way to go before they get anywhere near the level of some uber-obnoxious Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings book fans, but I bristle when there’s a hint of it anyway.
You HAVE the books, go read them again. Let those of us who liked the movie like the movie without feeling idiotic about it. The movie(s) will help book sales and will bring hundreds of thousands if not eventually millions of people to the books. Be happy.
*Jaws and The Godfather are two examples of movies that are WAY better than the books
FWIW, I adored the books and very much enjoyed the movie. I don’t think it’s very realistic to expect a movie adaptation of a book to hit all the same notes. I’m very interested to see how they do the next two movies, because I know that it’s going to be virtually impossible to reflect all of the subtleties of the books onto film. But that doesn’t mean I can’t embrace the films for what they are. I can’t wait to see what they do with the story - how they change it and to what extent - because there’s a reason books are books and movies are movies.
(The only situation that seems to spark my fangirl rage is when people criticize the entire franchise based solely on the movie - or worse, just the ads for the movie. They aren’t the same thing, and if you read the last two books you know they REALLY aren’t the same thing, and, well, it’s irritating.)
At what point in my post did I say the non book readers are dummies? I felt I was quite clear pointing out the ways that the movie failed as a movie (bad characterization, storytelling, pacing) way more than I did comparing it apples to apples with the book
They address this in the second book. In the first book they mention in passing that the Capitol keeps the districts ignorant about what happens in other districts, she is cautious about the GameKeepers hearing her and Rue conversing about their districts during the game.
But in the second book, when she goes on tour as the winner, she realizes that some of the districts such as the agriculturally based 11, are MUCH larger than District 12 and she speculates about how they must have some sort of “pre-reaping” as she realizes that the crowd she sees in the videos of the reapings could not possibly be all the eligible children in District 11.
Read the book, then saw the movie and went back and read the book again.
I thought the movie was really true to the book, I didn’t realize how true until my second read. The major difference is that the book is entirely from Katniss’s POV where the movie steps out and shows the scenes of the gamekeepers and control room that would be outside of her POV.
This works well. For example, we see the gamekeepers start the fire to drive her back into the heart of the game…in the book we “hear” her mentally analysing the fire and determining it to be unnatural and part of the game and she knows why they are doing it.
They did dampen down the ending of the Games tremendously, I assume that this was to maintain the PG-13 rating. In addition to not using the creepy Tribute clone mutations they made Cato’s death a lot cleaner, in the book he was wearing body armor and the mutts chewed on his face for a full day while Katniss and Peeta listened. They also toned down Katniss and Peeta’s physical condition at games end, in the book Peeta is at death’s door and Katniss is emaciated, feral and half insane.
There is a little subplot that was eliminated – it is foreshadowed in book one and expanded in book two — involving the parents. In the book, Katniss gets the Mockingjay pin from a “sort of friend”, the mayor’s daughter Madge and it is later revealed that that Madge’s mother’s sister was Tribute in the 50th Games and wore the pin into the arena. There is also a strange scene where Peeta’s father (whom she doesn’t really know ) visits Katniss before she leaves for the Capitol, bringing her pastries and he promises her that he will make sure Prim “eats”…it is later hinted that he wanted to marry Katniss’s mom when they were young, only she went for the handsome coal miner that was below her class.
I kind of missed this complication but I understand why it was eliminated because it was really peripheral.
There were things I would’ve done differently but I liked the movie. I think Primrose Everdeen was the first book character I’ve encountered that looked EXACTLY like I imagined her in the movies. And I think the actress playing Rue gave the best performance, she was perfect.
Wife and I went to see it today. We’ve both read all three books. There were things we liked, and things we didn’t like. Game control room, rose garden scenes with President Snow, and Seneca Crane’s ironic end are all pluses, lack of detail on the wolf-mutts, absence of Madge, and no body armour for Cato (what do you think was in his backpack at the feast?) were minuses.
I got a laugh from the girl at the concession stand when I ordered an extra-large lamb stew over rice with dried plums. That she reacted at all tells me she’d also read the book*.
When Caesar Flickerman asks Katniss in her before-game interview what she like best about the Capitol, the only positive she can come up with is how tasty the lamb stew is. Haymitch later sends Peeta and Katniss a parachute loaded with lamb stew and rice when they’re in the arena after Katniss figures out Haymitch is rewarding her romantic efforts with Peeta. None of this, though, occurs in the film.
The thing is. I wouldn’t know the mutant dogs are supposed to be weird clone-mutts of the fallen tributes because they spent so little time developing them as distinct characters.
My only complaint is that they could have made it a bit darker and more hard core. Not violence for it’s own sake, but to make the whole thing feel a bit more raw and visceral. More “True Blood” and less “Twilight” / “Vampire Diaries”.
The target age for the books is fifth grade. So you are walking a line of “will a ten year old girl’s mother let her see it.” They are really dark for fifth grade, but that was when the kids all read them - and young adult lit and even kid lit seems to enjoy having a dark streak through it. Make it much darker and you’d have parents up in arms.
As it is about half of my daughter’s friends have not been permitted to see the movie, although they’ve read the books.
I thought the movie was excellent. I had no trouble following the plot or many of the subtleties the book readers have referred to in this thread.
Some random thoughts I had:
[ul]
[li]I actually liked the camera work at the beginning–it felt like seeing flashes of poverty in Appalachia.[/li]
[li]Other than the too-small population in District 12, the world felt decently fleshed out for me.[/li]
[li]My impression during the movie was that Katniss’s primary motivation was to get back home alive, and if this required faking a relationship with Peeta, then so be it. I never actually got the impression that she was actually in love with him or anything even close to that, but I did get the impression that she developed some affection for him in the course of their shared horrific experience.[/li]
[li]I thought that the movie was very well paced. For such a lengthy movie, I never looked at my watch once.[/li]
[li]I liked how many of the employees of the Games were not played up as evil caricatures, including the TV host and the Gamemaker. I liked the flash of humanity that Cata showed at the end.[/li]
The biggest thing that bothered me in the movie is that they never showed Katniss making any effort to retrieve her limited arrows.[/ul]
Just saw it. Have not read the books so I have a few questions.
Is it stated in the books that this is America in the future?
Was the arena like a holodeck from Star Trek (TNG)?
How did the father die? In a coal mining accident? Or something else?
Does it state what the original ‘rebellion’ was about?
Something mentioned upthread. That Peeta made fancy cakes for the upperclass. Are there upperclass people in district 12 or do they ship the cake by high speed rail for several hours to the capitol?
Yes I got the flash back scenes about Peeta and the bread.
In case you’re wondering, I didn’t enjoy it very much at all. I did think the actress that played Katniss was very good. I thought the boy who played Peeta was Woody Harelson’s real life son. He looked like Woody from Cheers!
Too lazy to parse the quote, but to answer the above questions: Yes, it is explicitly stated in the book that this is America in the future. District 12 is where Appalachia used to be, and the Capitol is in the Rocky Mountains.
The arena was a real place that had been specially prepared for the Games. It was surrounded by a force field so that none of the Tributes could get out of it unless as a corpse or as the victor. I know where you’re coming from, though; I was also left wondering what the deal was with the beasts they had at the end of the Games in the movie.
Katniss’ father died in a mine explosion, which also killed Gale’s father (I don’t think that was mentioned in the film).
The original rebellion was the Districts against the Capitol, but the specific grievances weren’t named.
There is a merchant class in District 12, with town people such as Katniss’ mother’s family, who had run an apothecary, and also administrators such as the Mayor and the Head Peacekeeper, who could conceivably have the money to afford a fancy cake from time to time.
If you ask me, the film is basically written by Glen Beck. It is about as abodimal as the “Welcome to Obamaville” ad by Rick Santorum.
It’s the “Heartland” being mightly abused by those darn city people. Note how the city people dress and act. Note the President’s speech about “hope”. This movie was offensive. It’s worse than Ayn Rand.
Anyway, I didn’t take away any particular reference to current politics or Ayn Rand’s philosophy. It’s just your typical post-apocalyptic, dystopian setting seen in many other books and movies. The setting rather reminded me of The Handmaid’s Tale.
I’ve never read the books, and I enjoyed the movie quite a bit. I didn’t think it was hard to follow at all.
One nitpick: Lenny Kravitz states that he “isn’t allowed to gamble.” That implies gambling is pretty widespread (we also see the odds during the tv broadcast). Given that, if I were betting on Katniss, and the producers killed her off early with artificial fire, I’d be pretty pissed off. Thinking about that took me out of the movie for almost a minute!
In fact, it’s a common theme in both science fiction and actual reality where the gleaming shining City represents the center of government, commerce, culture and so forth while the surrounding rural area is backward and poor.
Do you remember the speech where the president explains why they have a winner at all? Why not just kill 24 children each year?
Oh the beautiful high speed rail they used, remind you of anyone? Perhaps a sitting president who uses the word that is the answer to the first question?
It’s not quite Red Dawn but it’s not fooling me for a minute.
I know it’s a joke, but since some idiots will take it seriously, that’s crazy, teabagger talk. If we’re taking this in a political direction, everyone in the Capitol would be the future Republican/Libertarians, and the rebels would be fed-up future Democrats/Independents.
I wonder what party those moronic racists in the earlier link belong to. (wait, stupid, moronic racists, considering that Rue in the book is obviously black, and they totally missed it)
