I've seen the book in the stores and was slightly intrigued when I read the description on the dust cover. That was until I saw the recommendation from Stephanie Meyer. I want to avoid hyperbole here, but let's just say that I put the book down and haven't thought of picking it up again. Maybe it's a magnificent book, but now it just feels tainted.
Not to seem like a jerk, but that's a really dumb reason not to try something new. So it's liked by someone you personally dislike. So what? Stephanie Meyer didn't write the book... she simply read it, liked it, commented on it, and weather or not she has any real writing ability, she has become a rather influential name, which is why they included her recommendation. But tainted? Really? So, if Justin Bieber decides that he likes Lord of the Flies, and his recommendation appears on the next big reprint of that book, will it become tainted?
You don't come of as a jerk at all. Maybe a bit predictable, but not a jerk. I knew there would be a righteous "don't judge a book by its cover" comment. I guess what really turns me off is that there were dozens of authors they could have asked for recommendations, but they went with her. That means that they're targeting an audience that would also like her particular style and\or they were hoping to capitalize on her series' popularity. I guess if it was to be taken as serious dramatic science fiction and not blatant teen Mary Sue wish fulfilment, they should have chosen more wisely.
"The Games are a combination of government intimidation tactics towards the districts and reality television; basically, the Tributes are forced to murder each other for the public entertainment of upper class society."
No, this is more or less Battle Royale: The PG edition (Atleast, compared to the manga). At any rate, kind of saw this coming since the damned books were so popular...havn't read them as it did remind me a bit of battle Royale (Which disturbed even me) so yeah.
The first book was enjoyable enough, but the other two weren't all that great. The third book's ending felt really rushed and very poorly written, and time's flow was really disjointed when
roughly around when they made it to President Snow's house and Primrose died and the rest of the book onward.
Also, I really didn't like Katniss very much at all even though I should have, and I absolutely hated the forced romance between Katniss and Peta. It would have been so much better if Katniss had, you know, gone with someone she liked (sayyy, Gale), but I digress.
Wait, what were we talking about? The movie? Oh yeah. I'm wary of it since I've been let down so many times by book to film adaptations. Mostly with them straying too far from the source.
First off: The Hunger Games is shockingly good for a kids' book. Don't dismiss it because of its target demographic. Don't dismiss it because Stephanie Meyer liked it. Certainly don't dismiss it if you didn't like this trailer; I didn't either.
IndomitableSam said:
When I started reading the book, I was reminded of the dozens of other dystopian teen books out there and this did not stand out. If you want a good teen one (teen books are pretty flimsy on story no matter what), try Birthmarked by Caragh M. O'Brien. I actually quite enjoyed it.
I've read my fair share of "teen" books, and I have to disagree - I enjoyed the Hunger Games series far more than any other teen story I've read in recent memory. The books themselves are incredibly dark and very well-written; they have a breakneck writing style that makes them enjoyable, and gives you a great sense that the story is unfolding before you, rather than just being recounted. Yes, they're hampered by some cheesy romance stuff (though even that is well done because of the way it's played out in the characters' minds), and yes, there are some bits where you can tell it's really not an adult's book, but those parts fade into the background very quickly when you get caught up in the story itself.
In any case, back on the trailer, it didn't really gel with my mental picture of the world, and I think I prefer the one I came up with. I'd always envisioned things as being a bit brighter, a bit more saccharine-sweet (especially in the Capitol); to be honest, I'd imagined most of the characters as looking more fragile, more childish and less "teen," even the protagonists. In general, it seemed too dark - not in tone of content, but in the filmography and stylistic choices. This is a dark story, but the darkness is from the character interaction and events, not a drab color palette. I'm also worried, like a lot of people, that it'll become a generic teen romance flick that happens to have action in it - but we'll see.
I was quite surprised by the books myself. I was hesitant, but by the first book's end, so glad that I decided to buy them all (before Borders went under).
A lot of young adult books try to be edgy and dark, but the Hunger Games stood out to me for some reason. It wasn't overdone in the emotional aspects and actually presented a dystopian future that wasn't plagued with a certain air of "trying too hard" to attract an audience on dystopia alone. There was actually more to it than "the future sucks, boo hoo," and I liked the change of pace that ended with blood being spilled more often than tears. Boo f-ing hoo inded.
I'll be interested to see how the violence plays out because that part really caught my attention regarding the books. It might be "YA," but it was certainly gruesome!
soren7550 said:
The first book was enjoyable enough, but the other two weren't all that great. The third book's ending felt really rushed and very poorly written, and time's flow was really disjointed when
roughly around when they made it to President Snow's house and Primrose died and the rest of the book onward.
Also, I really didn't like Katniss very much at all even though I should have, and I absolutely hated the forced romance between Katniss and Peta. It would have been so much better if Katniss had, you know, gone with someone she liked (sayyy, Gale), but I digress.
Wait, what were we talking about? The movie? Oh yeah. I'm wary of it since I've been let down so many times by book to film adaptations. Mostly with them straying too far from the source.
All good points! Especially that forced romance bit. I'm a standard-fare guy that doesn't give much of a care about those typical aspects in stories when there's action to be had, but it was grinding my nerves throughout the series. What worried me the most for the film adaption was when I heard who was playing Peta (Hutcherson or something?) and I honestly can't stand him in a majority of the films he's ever been in. Now we'll likely have three times him. Dammit.
You're right on the money about that book-to-film issue, though. Some parts of the Hunger Games series are pretty damn gory, and anything less is going to feel like an obvious attempt to garner a younger audience. Never mind the fact there is everything else to be considered like small details, skipped plot points, character exposition being skimped, ect.
I just hope it's more on the Harry Potter end of the spectrum rather than that one with the Greek Gods camp (I forget the name, but it had the son of Posiedon, satyr, plotline that's completely different from the book, that one).
You're right on the money about that book-to-film issue, though. Some parts of the Hunger Games series are pretty damn gory, and anything less is going to feel like an obvious attempt to garner a younger audience. Never mind the fact there is everything else to be considered like small details, skipped plot points, character exposition being skimped, ect.
I just hope it's more on the Harry Potter end of the spectrum rather than that one with the Greek Gods camp (I forget the name, but it had the son of Posiedon, satyr, plotline that's completely different from the book, that one).
Percy Jackson and the Olympians. Plot line completely different from the book? Goddamnit, ANOTHER reason not to watch it now. I dropped it quite literally within 5 seconds of the pool scene, cause the implications just broke any semblance of plot twist. I hate movies like that. And I loved the bleeding books, too. And then they go and ruin it.
The only exception to that type of movie is HTTYD, cause I'm not quite sure how you could've made a good movie by following the book....
But, I digress. Hunger Games will most likely be like Percy Jackson, not HP. HP actually had likeable characters. At least for a while. HG, on the other hand, has a lot of angsty teens. Angsty for good reason, yes, but angsty nonetheless. And sweet jesus, is Katniss naive. Seriously, it was painful to see how completely naive she was. She seemed to refuse to believe that people should die in war. The word "casualties" didn't seem to compute with her.
The forced romance is precisely that, and it was horrible. I wouldn't even call it romance, more like Stockholm syndrome, or something similar.
I'm guessing the movie will be very similar to katniss, it won't be able to withstand death. It'll imply it, but I doubt anybody will truly die onscreen. And I would love to see the endwar scene
she shoots that female commander through the fucking mouth. How are they gonna show that?
and how they handle such blatant killing.
*sigh* Oh, hollywood. When will you ever grow up, and realize that the younger audience has already seen it all anyway?
Percy Jackson and the Olympians. Plot line completely different from the book? Goddamnit, ANOTHER reason not to watch it now. I dropped it quite literally within 5 seconds of the pool scene, cause the implications just broke any semblance of plot twist. I hate movies like that. And I loved the bleeding books, too. And then they go and ruin it.
The only exception to that type of movie is HTTYD, cause I'm not quite sure how you could've made a good movie by following the book....
But, I digress. Hunger Games will most likely be like Percy Jackson, not HP. HP actually had likeable characters. At least for a while. HG, on the other hand, has a lot of angsty teens. Angsty for good reason, yes, but angsty nonetheless. And sweet jesus, is Katniss naive. Seriously, it was painful to see how completely naive she was. She seemed to refuse to believe that people should die in war. The word "casualties" didn't seem to compute with her.
The forced romance is precisely that, and it was horrible. I wouldn't even call it romance, more like Stockholm syndrome, or something similar.
I'm guessing the movie will be very similar to katniss, it won't be able to withstand death. It'll imply it, but I doubt anybody will truly die onscreen. And I would love to see the endwar scene
she shoots that female commander through the fucking mouth. How are they gonna show that?
The Percy Jackson books already were set up to have an amazing film transition because the plot was balanced with plenty of action, mythology, excitement. They even had Pierce Brosnan as Chiron, Uma Thurman as Medusa, and just an overall good supporting cast. ... and Hollywood made it into a 1980's fetch quest. It screwed up the whole story so badly - especially with Luke - that I don't know how they could have ever thought that a sequel would be feasible.
Cirque du Freak was a movie that I enjoyed enough read the book, and then the next, and then the whole (massive) series. The difference was night and day (no vampire pun intended), especially with the book's graphic nature that would definitely[i/] warrant an R rating. The movie was "based" off the first three novels, if you get all of your plots from the comments section of cliffnotes, sparknotes, and a fan site. That happened because they had to cut down the books plots, remove characters (let alone characterization for those that remained), and made it PG-13.
That is the type of mess that I earnestly hope that not only the Hunger Games avoids, but hell, any book series that could transition to film. And it should be mentioned that the rival/villain in Cirque was the same kid who's Peta in the Hunger Games trailer/movie. Your Stockholm syndrome analogy is perfect for how I feel about 90 or more minutes that is going to likely play a heavy hand on the emotional card. HP did it, particularly in HP 6 with all of the romance crap that droned out any actual plot, and it will be even more cloyingly awful given HG's plot that actually has romance as more than a footnote. All that angst will be multiplied by a thousand for film audiences, and quite frankly that is the last thing we need in this world after Twilight.
Just an additional thought that occurred to me is that, as you mention, Katniss has a lot of naivety regarding war and death. Imagine all of that angsty drama and fade to slow-motion then switch back to fast present time, mid-battle emotional crisis, guilt, inopportune moment of sympathy-that-gets-people-killed potential... now I'm more worried. Let's hope that the movie has some restraint, just some when it comes to angst.
The part of me that enjoyed the books is still excited, but on the whole I'm still wary after so many past failures that had Harry Potter movie ambitions and failed to get even a direct-to-DVD second chance.
Averant said:
*sigh* Oh, hollywood. When will you ever grow up, and realize that the younger audience has already seen it all anyway?
A lot of the blame belongs to the institution behind it all. Why do we always see so many toned down PG-13 movies? Because R movies are a 100% no-go for anyone underage. That turns into less sales, so movie studios can tone down material to attain the wider audience and better profits. The King's Speech released a "special version" that was PG-13 just for that reason under the guise that everyone should see this film!
It mirrors the video game conundrum of AO (Adults Only) video games. We can't also have NC-17 or AO games because they're taboo - despite the fact that today's R film isn't as shocking as it was to audiences in the past, including the increased gratuity. A new ratings bracket would help alleviate the whole mess since there isn't any buffer between [R-rated Inception, King's Speech, ect.] and [R-rated Human Centipede, Saw, SEX SCENE!!!!, ect], but overall the ratings boards seem like a fickle and easily-manipulated bunch, making the whole thing a bit of a racket. Some restrictions make sense, but like with M rated games, there is a line where you kinda go "eh" because by today's standards it's moderate compared to its fellows in the same rating. As a last tangent, sex becomes problematic as far as R ratings go and would thus become a trouble if, say, R rated movies were not so restrictive of audiences (like PG-13 movies) because here in the U.S. there is a very messed up taboo over sex that varies so much (watch any reality tv show) that I don't think anyone can figure out.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
