While I haven't watched the movie (yet), I'm going to chime in on one of the points, about how it seems like the Capital is like San Francisco - and the implication that there is a bit of homophobia going on here, and take on part of one of the criticisms of the series as a whole, as to why it took 75 years for the Districts to start rebelling.
Something that I thought was pretty clear in the first movie (and all of the books) was that the people in the Capital have priorities that we are supposed to see as being terrible. They are so isolated from the rest of the world, from the 12 districts that they literally don't see the people of the districts as anything more than Tributes - and that the Hunger Games may be the only time they actually see people from the Districts on a regular basis. When you have little to no contact with a subset of people... it's hard to see them as actual human beings in the best of circumstances. (see: talking to rural Christian folk about Muslims, Goths, City folk or crime rates in cities.) When you have the potential propaganda campaign around those people being Tributes, dying for your entertainment, and that has likely been going on for your entire life (75 years now), it's going to be almost impossible for people to overcome it. Hell, we're 68 years past World War 2 and we STILL tend to think of "German" with "Evil". We treat it like it's a joke - speaking German romantically is considered hilarious to a large swath of people - but there's still a tendency to have evil characters speak German, have links to Germany in one way or another (See: Dr. Heinz Doofenshmirtz from Phineas and Ferb) - and we're the Good Guys here. We allow ourselves to treat German and Germans like this due to the crimes that Nazi Germany committed in WWII. Take it to an extreme, have Germany win in WWII, and you could see the Russians, British and Americans be characterized in far worse ways by the Nazi's.
As for how this could happen and continue to happen for 75 years? Slavery in America lasted for hundreds of years. Metaphorically, I see the people of the Capital are sort of like White Americans from the 17th, 18th and early 19th century, and the people of the Districts are sort of like the Slaves in America - all of the slaves are hideously mistreated due to just happening to be of direct African descent, but most of the Whites are just clueless. They were born into a society where they were on top and AA's were not human, so that's they way it's supposed to be. When they do see the mistreatment of individual slaves, either it's ignored, rationalized (the slave deserves to be lynched) or encouraged by the majority of the ruling class. Sons watch their fathers beat slaves to work faster and learn that this is the accepted way of doing it. Daughters are told from a young age that it's not appropriate for a lady to be seen with a slave, so they don't even try to become friendly with them. Is the son an "evil" person for growing up to beat slaves into working faster? Is the daughter an "evil" person for utterly ignoring the existence of slaves (with only a few specific exceptions, like ordering house slaves to do work and the like)? It's ambiguous at best.
Sticking with the American slavery metaphor, look at the typical clothing we tend to associate with slaves and slave owners. Slaves wear simple, practical clothing that is drab and lifeless, while many of the slave owners (particularly the women) wear clothing that is absurd. Useless and decadent at best, insulting at worst - clothing that a woman can't put on by herself but requires the aid of a slave (or two) to get into. (so not only does the owner wear something that is useless and decadent, the slaves actually have to help her get herself dressed because she can't do it herself) And what's the point of all these useless and decadent clothes? To look better in social situations. To look pretty. To do nothing of real value. (For both men and women, the women's clothing is just more obvious about it.) Or look at pre-revolution France, if you want to see men dressed up as uselessly as woman. There are plenty of examples of a ruling class dressing outrageously compared to the "lower" classes.
Got off on a bit of a tangent there, but essentially: Hunger Games is NOT Homophobic in the least and it's not a stretch of any means that this could go on for 75 years.
![jFr[e]ak93](https://eg-forums-escapist-data.nyc3.digitaloceanspaces.com/data/avatars/l/91/91030.jpg?1620781506){kind=avatar}
