Just got in from seeing the midnight Premiere of The Hunger Games.....

[MariannNOVA]

IF YOU HAVE NOT READ THE BOOK AND ARE GOING TO SEE THE FILM, YOU MAY NOT WANT TO READ THIS --

 

Everyone can read this part here -- no spoilers ETA @ 10am friday: They have done to the movie when one compares it to the book what reality tv does to real life -- does that make sense? They have basically done what the gamemaker does to THe HUNGER GAMES as far as deciding what the public gets to see. There is a huge, rich story with depth and history, and the movie shows you what is absolutely necessary for you to follow and see the 'reality' that the producer/director want you to see. Does that makes sense? In that sense -- it is brilliant.

 

 

 

 

All three kids were with me........I re-read the book last week so the scenes from the book that concerned me were fresh in my mind.

 

Seeing the film without having read the book will leave you with some questions.

 

There are some scenes in the book that provide comic relief (Haymitch falling off the stage) that are not in the film.

 

In fact, I was immediately struck at the very beginning of the film when the reaping occurs at the way the grimness, hopelessness, and grittiness of life in District 12 is captured.

 

Donald Sutherland, Woody Harrelson, Stanley Tucci and Wes Bentley (? Gamemaker) are superb.

 

Effie Trinket's role is much smaller in the film than in the book....she provides much comic relief in the book.....the film is not a comedy -- there is little in it that is 'funny' if anything.

 

I covered dd11.5's eyes probably three times -- there are some hand to hand combat scenes that are less graphic than the book but they are still intense.

 

The muttation scene at the end was intense -- dd11.5 did not watch it -- the film does that whole scene with Cato in a less graphic way than the book does -- but dd still did not watch that scene.

 

I found the film thought-provoking -- I tried to watch it and imagine what it would be like to watch it and not have read the book and alot of the depth of the characters and setting would be lost.

There were, as I said, about 4 or 5 scenes that I would have liked to see in the film that were in the book, but I do see that Gary Ross (is that his name) and Suzanne Collins (she wrote the screenplay) were going for something more relevant to life today......the theme of desensitizing a society to violence is obviously there.....as is the theme of the danger that hope and love play in Donald Sutherland's 'nation.'

 

Peeta (cannot remember who plays him), well, I could not help but love him. Gale's part is rather small -- he is hunky, though.

 

We are going to see it again tonight as we have friends whose son is an extra in the District 12 scenes -- and we were able to see him clearly on film tonight. I am looking forward to seeing it again - we saw it in Imax tonight and the theater was packed. For two hours and 22 minutes, you could have heard a pin drop - the audience did not make a sound and probably out of 200 people, 150 of them stayed to watched every single credit.

 

I thought it was funny as we walked out of the theater at 2:48am and there were a line of cars with parents there to pick up their kids.......

 

...and may the odds be ever in your favor.

Edited March 23, 2012 by MariannNOVA

[Kirch]

I just got in too. It was an incredible movie. Given the framework and limitations inherent in film (especially time limitations), they did an excellent job getting the essentials in. The acting is beautifully done. And I think it's one of the most faithful book adaptations I've ever seen--no major changes or additions (obviously they did have to leave things out). They did such a superb job of capturing so much of the book without any dialogue at all--like Marianne said, the atmosphere of District 12; the whole Katniss/Peeta/Gale thing--not a word said by any of them, but it's crystal clear; I know there's more but it's super late and I have to get up in the morning. I'm definitely going to see it again!

[KidsHappen]

We just got home as well. There were a few small changes or changed details and even though the movie was an two and a half hours long they really didn't get to cover things in as much deapth as I would have like to have seen. The movie was non-stop as it was though. Constant action, no wasted film time so I can see why they did it the way they did it. The two teens who have not read the book did not understand everything that was going on as well as the rest of us who had read the book. But given the limitations of turning a great book into a movie, I think they did a pretty good job.

[Pippen]

I agree--overall they did a good job with the film. Jennifer Lawrence was terrific!

 

I have major complaints with the filming techniques though. Early on especially they used a great deal of shaky camera, closeups, and blurring the background that I left with my eyes feeling really strained. I suppose it was meant to give a feeling of first person action, but it made me feel like it was shot by an amateur with an expensive hand held video camera. I came away with eye strain.

 

It's one of the first things that my 13yo mentioned (without prompting) as well.

 

We both commented that it seemed so streamlined we think anyone who hasn't read the books was going to miss out.

[MariannNOVA]

I woke up a few minutes ago and wanted to add this:

 

They have done to the movie when one compares it to the book what reality tv does to real life -- does that make sense? They have basically done what the gamemaker does to THe HUNGER GAMES as far as deciding what the public gets to see. There is a huge, rich story with depth and history, and the movie shows you what is absolutely necessary for you to follow and see the 'reality' that the producer/director want you to see. Does that makes sense? In that sense -- it is brilliant.