Hunger Games? What's so big about this?

[MamaBearTeacher]

I know nothing about this just that it is a book that was just made into a movie. Is it for adults or teens or both? What is so great about it? Why is everybody talking about it? Was it just very well done? Is it a must-see like Titanic or just another good movie? Do I need to read the book first?

[momma2three]

It's a very well written YA novel about life in a future dystopian North America, where all of the resources are concentrated in the capital city, and the rest of the country lives in extreme poverty. In order to punish the outlying areas (called districts) for a past revolt, every year each district must send two teenagers to appear on a reality TV show where they must fight to the death.

 

It's very well paced, very well written, and has some interesting things to say about the general trend our culture is taking.

 

Definitely read the books before you see the movie. I read all three in a weekend: they're not terribly long or terribly tough. But they are worth reading.

[SailorMom]

The author did a great job balancing a lower level of writing (easily read by an 11 yo I think) but having a story with mature themes and differing layers/depth of meaning based on the age of the reader.

[MamaBearTeacher]

For what age are they appropriate? My 8 and 10 year olds read at adult level but I always screen for violence, sexual content, too dark themes.

[Jennifer in MI]

Pre-read them. Decide for yourself. All my boys read them, but they are older. My youngest boy is 11. I think he got the most out of them, actually!

[momma2three]

I think 8 and 10 are too young. It's a book for teenagers. There's a teenage love triangle, and a lot of violence. More importantly, it's a criticism of our society's obsession with appearance, how desensitized we are becoming to violence, and the "bread and circuses" mentality of the media. I think a few more years experience in the real world would be useful to be able to understand the major themes of the book.

[PeacefulChaos]

I have no answers to your question, but I CAN say that I was already interested in reading the books (because of all the hoopla), and today, after reading all the threads about it, I feel like going to the theater to see the movie. :tongue_smilie: Despite having not read the books. :lol:

[Jennifer in MI]

I have no answers to your question, but I CAN say that I was already interested in reading the books (because of all the hoopla), and today, after reading all the threads about it, I feel like going to the theater to see the movie. :tongue_smilie: Despite having not read the books. :lol:

 

NOOOOOOO!!!! Don't do that!!!! Get a copy of the book. I swear you'll be finished within a day - two tops! Definitely read the book first. Really. This is one you don't want to see before you've read the book!!!

 

I found out today I can share books on my Kindle! Duh! If you'd like, I can share it with you if you have a Kindle or a Kindle app on your iPhone or iPad!

[MamaBearTeacher]

It sounds too mature for my children but I am interested!

[Hoggirl]

I think 8 and 10 are too young. It's a book for teenagers. There's a teenage love triangle, and a lot of violence. More importantly, it's a criticism of our society's obsession with appearance, how desensitized we are becoming to violence, and the "bread and circuses" mentality of the media. I think a few more years experience in the real world would be useful to be able to understand the major themes of the book.

 

Additionally, I believe the movie is rated PG-13. I wouldn't have allowed my ds to see a PG-13 movie at 8 or 10. My point being, if you feel the same way, you might wind up with a "battle," about seeing the movie after they've read the books if you let them read them now. YMMV.

[hillfarm]

There is a lot of violence in the movie, stabbings, people shot with arrows or spears, people stung to death, etc. If your children or family are sensitive to this - wait. Violence is central to the story, since it is based on a life-or-death competition in which the characters are forced to compete. The winner receives food and better living conditions for their family.

 

The main character volunteers to compete in place of her younger sister. The hero and heroine do kill others but only in self defense, to protect others, or as a mercy killing. They do not glory in it and do show repulsion and remorse for their acts. There are other characters who have been bred and trained to fight who show no remorse and actually enjoy killing others. However, it becomes clear that they, too, are victims of the government's scheme to punish/deter the citizens from revolting.

 

The books are relatively well written YA fiction lit. They are very popular with the public schools and often read in middle schools. There are many layers of meaning and numerous comparisons that can be made with historic societies and our modern society today, therefore opening up the opportunity for a wide variety of challenging discussions requiring deep thinking.

 

However the subject is very dark and violent. This is not intended to be a fun, entertaining movie. More one to ponder and provoke much thought. Parents with any hesitation should pre-read or preview the movie.

[PeacefulChaos]

NOOOOOOO!!!! Don't do that!!!! Get a copy of the book. I swear you'll be finished within a day - two tops! Definitely read the book first. Really. This is one you don't want to see before you've read the book!!!

 

I found out today I can share books on my Kindle! Duh! If you'd like, I can share it with you if you have a Kindle or a Kindle app on your iPhone or iPad!

 

Well, I don't have a Kindle or an iPad, and our library never has the book, and I don't really want to have to buy it.

So you can see my conundrum. :D

[Jennifer in MI]

Well, I don't have a Kindle or an iPad, and our library never has the book, and I don't really want to have to buy it.

So you can see my conundrum. :D

 

I bet you could borrow from a friend! I've had two or three friends on Facebook post today about how they needed a copy to read! Try that!

 

ETA: Or you could buy a Kindle or iPad! LOL

[Desert Rat]

My ds11 and I have read them (I read them first). We loved them. Opinions on this board vary so much about what is well-written and what is not and what is appropriate at what age, that I won't weigh in on those topics. Suffice it to say that this lady with an English degree loved them and I was fine with my advanced 11yo reading them. We will also be seeing the movie together. It's a date for us and I'm excited! My 9yo is too young for both the movie and the books. He's a different kid. I don't like to make sweeping judgements about what is appropriate for what age because kids are all different. My older son is perfectly fine with Hunger Game type scenerios. My youngest would have a hard time with things like that, even at 11, I think.

[Trilliums]

Well, I don't have a Kindle or an iPad, and our library never has the book, and I don't really want to have to buy it.

So you can see my conundrum. :D

 

 

Pretty sure you can get kindle for pc version. I had kindle on a laptop for a while. Documents were too hard to read for very long though.

 

I do have kindle on an ipad now. I'd love to have the book shared with me. DS was invited to the movie tomorrow and I was thinking of us all going along, but I haven't read it. He listened to it as an audio download from the library--I really wish I had listened to it as well!

[PeacefulChaos]

So I found a copy to read.

Question: Is the movie just the first book? If so, I can have that read in no time. I got it around 7:30 and am 1/3 of the way through it. :D

[Just Kate]

So I found a copy to read.

Question: Is the movie just the first book? If so, I can have that read in no time. I got it around 7:30 and am 1/3 of the way through it. :D

 

 

Yup, the movie is just the first book. Enjoy your read...I have read it twice already and am so excited to see the movie tomorrow night.

[Jennifer in MI]

Pretty sure you can get kindle for pc version. I had kindle on a laptop for a while. Documents were too hard to read for very long though.

 

I do have kindle on an ipad now. I'd love to have the book shared with me. DS was invited to the movie tomorrow and I was thinking of us all going along, but I haven't read it. He listened to it as an audio download from the library--I really wish I had listened to it as well!

 

Pm me your email. I think that is all I need! I am new to this lending on kindle thing!

[Mary in VA]

Costco has all three books now in hardback for $10.99 each.

[AndyJoy]

Costco has all three books now in hardback for $10.99 each.

 

I just discovered Amazon has all three hardbacks in a boxed set for $30! I already had the first in paperback and the other 2 in hardback, so I just ordered the first one for $9.48--plus it came with a $2 credit for the movie soundtrack.

[Butter]

It's impossible to generalize an age that's appropriate to read the books. My daughter read them first last fall at 11 1/2 (no, I didn't pre-read... the horrors... I trusted the opinion of my SIL since our daughters are very similar and a friend of my uncle's who originally recommended them to Ani). I read them because Ani begged me to. She loved them so much and wanted someone to discuss them with. My husband got the audiobooks and he listened to them and said our just-about-to-turn 10 year old would love them, too, so Cameron listened to them. I loved them so much I recommended my parents read them. My mom reads aloud to my dad all the time so she read the series to him and they loved them, too. My 10 year old really gets the deeper meanings no problem, BUT we have never sheltered our kids from anything and are not especially picky about their media consumption. He's listened to stuff like Ender's Game. However, at 8 I'm not sure he would've understood Hunger Games much. I don't doubt he'd've enjoyed listening to it, but I think at 10 he gets it better.

 

While my kids are advanced (Cameron listens to audiobooks instead of reading them because he's dyslexic, but he's one of those twice exceptional kids), I don't think that's really why at 10 and 12 they totally *get* Hunger Games. There is a group of kids at church that I love listening to talk to each other and recently Hunger Games has been a big topic. They've all read the books 6+ months ago. The kids are a 13 year old boy, a boy and a girl who are 12 1/2, and two just turned 12 year old girls. Most of the kids are perfectly average, all except my own daughter are not the oldest child in the family, and by what I have heard in their discussions, they absolutely understand the deeper meanings and get it. Likely it helps that they all have at least one parent who has read and likes the books and I have no doubt that there have been discussions in their households just like in ours about the books. I was thinking about why these kids see the deeper meanings and it occurred to me that they have grown up where violence is kind of a same old same old thing. Video games that some of them play are violent. Shows on TV are sometimes violent. The news is full of violence. And so these kids look at these books and see right past the horror of kids killing kids. It's kind of a non-issue to them. It's just the backdrop. They seem to go right to *why* there are kids killing kids. Why they are being forced. Why their parents accept this has to happen. And from there they go to the other issues like the excess of the capitol vs. the bleakness of the districts and so on. I think in some ways, because of the culture these kids have been brought up in, they are just kind of numb to that kind of violence. I have not decided if that is a good or bad thing yet.

Edited March 24, 2012 by Butter

[Melinda in VT]

I think kids in general are less freaked by kids being violent toward kids than adults are. I know I am more upset about violence against children now than I was when I was a kid.

 

As an adult, it's easy to see children as fragile and needing protection. When you are a child, you see children as people like yourself, capable of good and evil. Child villains aren't any more villainous for being children. Or at least, that's how I saw it when I was a child, and this seems to be how my kids see it now.

[Ecclecticmum]

hmmm...I knew nothing about this either. I may read the books, the watch the movie now, thanks! :)

 

I was wondering what was so big about this movie, but I am very fond of dystopian novels, so this sounds interesting!

[JMDRAD]

I think kids in general are less freaked by kids being violent toward kids than adults are. I know I am more upset about violence against children now than I was when I was a kid.

 

As an adult, it's easy to see children as fragile and needing protection. When you are a child, you see children as people like yourself, capable of good and evil. Child villains aren't any more villainous for being children. Or at least, that's how I saw it when I was a child, and this seems to be how my kids see it now.

 

:iagree:

[Chris in VA]

From Butter's post:

I was thinking about why these kids see the deeper meanings and it occurred to me that they have grown up where violence is kind of a same old same old thing. Video games that some of them play are violent. Shows on TV are sometimes violent. The news is full of violence. And so these kids look at these books and see right past the horror of kids killing kids. It's kind of a non-issue to them

 

That's one of the points the book makes--that people become numb to violence, to the point of becoming okay with it for entertainment, and that that is horrible.

 

IMO, most kids are too young to get that point, and are just an illustration of it!

 

As much as I enjoyed the story, I was constantly aware of the above, and the fact that I, too, was reading about violence for entertainment.

 

Spoiler: In the last book, esp, the author is careful to show the effects of the Hunger Games on Katniss, and how it deeply, deeply affected her to have to kill others for the government. Even the last paragraph or so of the book shows that--and I applaud the author for not glossing over it.

[Mama Lynx]

I did not think they were well written.

 

They were interesting and compelling, and I can see why they're popular - especially among a younger audience who largely has no experience with dystopian literature. I'm not saying I'd discourage teens from reading these, but I hope they'd go on to read works like 1984, The Lottery, Fahrenheit 451, etc.

[In the Rain]

I think kids in general are less freaked by kids being violent toward kids than adults are. I know I am more upset about violence against children now than I was when I was a kid.

 

As an adult, it's easy to see children as fragile and needing protection. When you are a child, you see children as people like yourself, capable of good and evil. Child villains aren't any more villainous for being children. Or at least, that's how I saw it when I was a child, and this seems to be how my kids see it now.

 

:iagree: I am continually surprised by my dd's observations on books and characters.

[Word Nerd]

Preread it. No one else can determine whether the series is appropriate for your child. The books are labeled Young Adult fiction.

[Karis]

 

 

That's one of the points the book makes--that people become numb to violence, to the point of becoming okay with it for entertainment, and that that is horrible.

 

 

As much as I enjoyed the story, I was constantly aware of the above, and the fact that I, too, was reading about violence for entertainment.

 

 

:iagree: Do you think young people will naturally come to this conclusion?

 

Does the movie/ do the books address this at all?

[akmommy]

It sounds too mature for my children but I am interested!

 

Looking at your signature I'd agree. I would wait until at least 11-12 before letting them read and even that depends on the individual child. If they are too young to grasp the greater theme of the story then it will probably just be scary to them.

 

My Dd read all three books at 13 and it has lead to awesome discussions, but only you can read and decide if and when your kids are ready for them. My DS is 12 and just started the first book(dad told him he couldnt see the movie until he had read the first book) and although I don't think he'll have a problem with the violence and scariness it's yet to be seen how much he'll pick up beyond that.

[Chris in VA]

 

 

That's one of the points the book makes--that people become numb to violence, to the point of becoming okay with it for entertainment, and that that is horrible.

 

 

As much as I enjoyed the story, I was constantly aware of the above, and the fact that I, too, was reading about violence for entertainment.

 

 

:iagree: Do you think young people will naturally come to this conclusion?

 

Does the movie/ do the books address this at all?

 

I don't know about the movie--do want to see it, tho, as the star is one of my favorite actors (she was fabulous in Winter's Bone).

 

I think I was trying to make the point that the statement that some kids can skip over the violence (i.e., it doesn't affect them/make an impact) and get the "deeper meaning" shows me that one of the deeper meanings is lost on them. That deeper meaning is just how numb to violence we can become when exposed to it so much! So in bypassing the violence, in a way, they are bypassing one of the many lessons the author is trying to get to.

 

And the fact that they don't naturally come to the ABOVE conclusion means, to me, that they've missed it, and that proves the very point, doesn't it?

 

 

The author shows her main character, Katniss, as very, very affected by the whole notion of the Hunger Games--the idea of having a gov't control its population in such a horrifying way is definitely brought out, but she does not bypass the effect violence of that type and level (killing for survival when you are a teen, and being forced to both watch it and participate in it as a parent or other member of society) has on people, esp Katniss.

[PeacefulChaos]

I didn't realize it was the girl from Winter's Bone! (I haven't seen the movie yet)

What's funny about that, is that I kept thinking of her as I was reading the book last night. Just with the hunting and cleaning the kills and stuff. I finished the book in 4 hours - it was an easy read. Not too bad, either. :)

I'm considering going to see the movie by myself after the kids are in bed tonight. We shall see...

[Butter]

I think I was trying to make the point that the statement that some kids can skip over the violence (i.e., it doesn't affect them/make an impact) and get the "deeper meaning" shows me that one of the deeper meanings is lost on them. That deeper meaning is just how numb to violence we can become when exposed to it so much! So in bypassing the violence, in a way, they are bypassing one of the many lessons the author is trying to get to.

 

And the fact that they don't naturally come to the ABOVE conclusion means, to me, that they've missed it, and that proves the very point, doesn't it?

 

Interesting that you see that as a deeper meaning. I didn't. At all. I actually *don't* think the people in the districts are numb to violence at all. They hated it. The people in the Capitol are totally numb - and into (really, I saw it more as they loved violence as opposed to numb to it) - violence, but I guess I just didn't identify with Capitol people at all personally, so I didn't give much thought to their thoughts and and feelings. I think that's a lovely part of these books and why discussion about them is so great. There are so many layers and things and one sees one thing and another sees another. My mom and I are getting ready to go see the movie (second time for both of us) and what you have said will definitely be something I'm thinking about as I watch.

 

BTW, Chris, I'm pretty sure our daughters were in Brownies together back when we lived in VA. Ani was asking if I knew what happened to some of the girls, yours included, not long ago :)

Edited March 24, 2012 by Butter

[Butter]

First of all, it was even better the second time. My mom (who I went with) thought so, too (she saw it yesterday morning the first time). Second, I don't think the Capitol people were numb to the violence. I think they just liked it a whole lot and wanted more. It was complete entertainment. Being numb to it, to me, means to ignore it. To my daughter and her friends violence just is. They ignore it. They are numb to it. The Capitol people downright reveled in it and loved it.

[Chris in VA]

Ah, I see. I think I mean numb to the suffering; numb may be a bad way to put it. Not having the proper empathetic response, maybe? I don't see violence as something we are designed to enjoy or revel in or just plain not find abhorrent. I'm having a hard time explaining myself! lol

(And yes, I remember you and Ani!!! Pm me!)

[brett_ashley]

I did not think they were well written.

 

They were interesting and compelling, and I can see why they're popular - especially among a younger audience who largely has no experience with dystopian literature. I'm not saying I'd discourage teens from reading these, but I hope they'd go on to read works like 1984, The Lottery, Fahrenheit 451, etc.

 

:iagree: entertaining but not well-written. If the author has to spell out in detail her metaphor--it's not a very good metaphor.

 

Also quotes like this leave me twitching: "I don't have time to think about kissing when I have a rebellion to incite." ughhhhh

[Butter]

Ah, I see. I think I mean numb to the suffering; numb may be a bad way to put it. Not having the proper empathetic response, maybe? I don't see violence as something we are designed to enjoy or revel in or just plain not find abhorrent. I'm having a hard time explaining myself! lol

(And yes, I remember you and Ani!!! Pm me!)

 

Yes, we're defining numb differently. I totally agree, yes, they were all numb in that way. My daughter and her friends are not. They find the killing, particularly compelled killing, completely abhorrent, but accept that it is there and is part of the book and so don't see the book as just all about that. We definitely are not designed to revel in killing. I don't know why or how humans could start to enjoy it, but we know it's not like Collins made that up for the books. She based that part on ancient Rome and the Gladiators. Is it the gluttony and excess of the Capitol (and Rome) that made them get to that point? Or something else? And why?

 

And your PM box is full ;-P

Edited March 25, 2012 by Butter

[Holly IN]

First of all, it was even better the second time. My mom (who I went with) thought so, too (she saw it yesterday morning the first time). Second, I don't think the Capitol people were numb to the violence. I think they just liked it a whole lot and wanted more. It was complete entertainment. Being numb to it, to me, means to ignore it. To my daughter and her friends violence just is. They ignore it. They are numb to it. The Capitol people downright reveled in it and loved it.

 

That is exactly what I got out of the book. However did they have a choice? I didn't think they had a choice in whether to watch the games or not. However there is an indication they wanted more killings and torture.

 

I haven't seen the movie yet. Not sure if we will.

 

 

:iagree:

 

Holly

[cloudswinger]

That is exactly what I got out of the book. However did they have a choice? I didn't think they had a choice in whether to watch the games or not. However there is an indication they wanted more killings and torture.

 

I haven't seen the movie yet. Not sure if we will.

 

 

:iagree:

 

Holly

 

To me, the Capitol people do not have their own kids in the show, so can gloss over the killing/be killed aspect. The Districts are required to watch, the games are a form of control, to remind them that they are powerless to protect their own children. When they did the reaping from the former victors in the 2nd book, who had developed relationships with the Capitol viewers, that's when the Capitol started having issues with their own populace.

 

Look at how much we care when kids are killed in Afghanistan versus one kid in Florida. I don't think we are any more callous to those deaths, but distance does make it easier to overlook the violence.

[mommymilkies]

From Butter's post:

I was thinking about why these kids see the deeper meanings and it occurred to me that they have grown up where violence is kind of a same old same old thing. Video games that some of them play are violent. Shows on TV are sometimes violent. The news is full of violence. And so these kids look at these books and see right past the horror of kids killing kids. It's kind of a non-issue to them

 

That's one of the points the book makes--that people become numb to violence, to the point of becoming okay with it for entertainment, and that that is horrible.

 

IMO, most kids are too young to get that point, and are just an illustration of it!

 

As much as I enjoyed the story, I was constantly aware of the above, and the fact that I, too, was reading about violence for entertainment.

 

:iagree: I have only read the first and I am 1/2 way through Catching Fire. I think these are beautifully written. My 10 and 11 year olds have read them (the 10 yo only read the first because he said it was too disturbing to go on-he is very emotionally sensitive).