The Hunger Games

[badtzmaru]

Mar 28, 2012 10:56:12 GMT -4 Mugsy said:

I don't understand those tweeting twits linked above. Rue is black, it says so in the book. Even if it didn't, why does it matter? It doesn't change anything regarding the story arc.

I read the book really fast so I missed the line about Rue being black. What I remembered most about Rue was that she was so tiny and I think that the actress that plays her fit the bill physically to a T. I also think that she is an absolutely beautiful girl. And, please, does it matter if Cinna is not black in the book? The movie gave us Lenny Kravitz in gold eyeliner appreciate it.


It would be nice if we could maybe someday get to a point where the best actor is cast in a role regardless of ethnicity but I fear we are a very long way away from that day.

[bitca]

Mar 28, 2012 15:30:28 GMT -4 @badtzmaru said:

The movie gave us Lenny Kravitz in gold eyeliner appreciate it.

Preach. We need a drooling icon. Gotdamn. I wanna clone him.

[kostgard]

In more "dumbass reaction to this movie" news, apparently Fox News ran a piece where they tried to say that this movie was a warning against Big Government. Yeeeeaaaaah.

Nevermind that the Big Government they rail against is social programs, which gives shit to poor people, and that's not what happens in this movie. It seems to me that in Panem the government mostly takes away or limits people's rights and makes sure that the poor stay poor while a select group at the top gets all the breaks.

[Karen]

The movie was surprisingly short. I would gladly have watched another 15 or so minutes because there seems to be a lot of worldbuilding stuff in the books that I've heard about and would have liked to see onscreen. There was that great riot scene in District 11, but I think it would have clarified things a bit if we'd been told that people are apparently not allowed to learn what goes on outside their own district; that would make it more understandable why it's taken so long for a rebellion to start. Also, things like Effie never being named onscreen, IIRC, and Peeta having a stylist of his own who was in some group scenes even though her role was never really explained (I can't remember whether she got a single line - maybe some background dialogue). Cinna seemed to be in charge of the parade costumes. Did Peeta have a separate stylist just for his interview clothes?

But in general I liked the movie and want to see the sequel. The actors were good (Lawrence was the standout, Sutherland was a nice creepy grandfather type, none of the younger actors annoyed me). I haaaate shakycam, but could accept it when they had that first chaotic bloodbath; on other occasions I mostly wished they'd been a little more conventional.

[Deleted]

The shaky cam drove me nuts. I get what they were going for but still it was too much. It kind of made sense at the cornucopia but other times I thought I was losing my eyesight because I couldn't focus on anything on the screen. Other than that I thought it was pretty solid. It was as faithful as they could be to the book and the few changes they did make such as the control room enhanced the storyline. I saw this with a couple of people who had not read the book and they had no trouble following the plot at all.

[ernestine]

I am sorry if this has been asked before (I have not read this thread yet as I don't want to be spoiled on the movie) but do you think this movie is too gory for 10 year olds? My kids really want to go (mostly because I am going with their older brother I think). They have not read the book yet but I gave them a general overview. I guess I want to know how much actual killings you see or if it's mostly off screen. Anything nightmare inducing for pre-teens or should I keep them away? I was leaning towards not taking them but then they started in about how they are not babies! and now I'm unsure. Thanks!

[kostgard]

There really isn't a lot of blood and guts (there is some, but it isn't gratuitous), but people - kids - do die on screen. Some events are really sad.

I definitely wouldn't call this movie completely off-limits to kids, but I think it probably depends on the kid. I probably could have handled it when I was 10. But if your kiddo is sensitive some parts may be kinda tough.

[Babycakes]

There one scene of a frenzied attack where you see multiple people being attacked, and some flashes of weapons. There's some blood, but you don't see weapons actually going in. It could be rather intense. There's also a few brief scenes with people with bloodied wounds. It's a personal judgement on how much you think the kids can handle, or on what you think the kids should see. Personally, I think it's okay for 10/11 year olds, but they might look away like some adults have when things get too intense. If all else fails, see it first with the older kid, make the call on if it's too much, and then take the younger ones. Hope that helps.

[ernestine]

Thanks so much! Yeah, I think we're going. They've got their hearts set on it. One can definitely handle it, the other will probably get scared but... I think they'll be OK. I am definitely going to tell them beforehand about Rue. Thanks again!

[Deleted]

I think that the book was much more violent than the movie. The movie did a good job of showing what was happening, but not making it overwhelmingly gory.