Login

My Jelly Bean

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 38
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    6,027
    Blog Entries
    1

    The Hunger Games

    What did you think of the movie? [I went to the midnight premiere, and my friends and I were so excited. We read the book and were expecting something amazing. I was highly disappointed. The direction was just awful. If I knew it was going to be as bad as it was, I would definitely have not wanted them to even make it. It doesn't do the book justice, in my opinion. Any thoughts?]
    RIP Dad. I miss you. <3

  2. #2
    I havent seen it yet, but that saddens me...I was really looking forward to it
    A piece of my heart lies with my Golden, now and forever. RIP Teddy. I love you.
    06/14/2002-28/10/2010

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    12,636
    I actually liked it a lot. They got the right 'mood' for each place: the capitol, the districts, the arena, etc. I was also impressed by the lead actors, they were great.
    One thing: why no Madge? That was an odd omission.
    ad astra per aspera

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    6,027
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Idioteque View Post
    I actually liked it a lot. They got the right 'mood' for each place: the capitol, the districts, the arena, etc. I was also impressed by the lead actors, they were great.
    One thing: why no Madge? That was an odd omission.
    I thought the mood was terrible. They excluded so many things and the battle scenes looked cheap and were too toned down. The only good thing about the film was the acting.
    RIP Dad. I miss you. <3

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    5,843
    Blog Entries
    2
    I have to disagree, I thought it was really great. Although I feel the ending was a bit rushed.
    Alexithymia is a term coined by Peter Sifneos in 1973 to describe a state of deficiency in understanding, processing, or describing emotions. It's pronounced uh-lecks-uh-thigh-me-uh.

    "An intellectual is a person that's found one thing more interesting than sex"- Aldous Huxley

  6. #6
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    824
    I actually thought the movie was brilliant. For time constraints, obviously things were shortened and I would had liked to see more connections made between characters, but I understand that time was an issue.
    THe only thing I really didn't like that the changed was the Madge thing and the rocks off the roof, because both those set things up for later in the trilogy.
    I found this really interesting. And I agree with most of it.
    Mikaela.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,627
    The key to enjoying a movie adaptation is to think of it separately from the book, otherwise the inevitable changes can lead to great disappointment. The link discoverMC posted gives great comparisons. I thought movie was a good balance between the book and the cinematic elements necessary to visualize or shorten the plot. Since Suzanne Collins co-wrote and co-produced the film, I assume the changes as a whole are acceptable and will be weaved well into the following movies.

    As a PG-13 movie the battle scenes were understandably toned down; showing more realistic fighting wouldn't be as suitable for the younger audience. The poverty of the districts versus the overblown opulence of the Capitol was done well, plus the city itself was absolutely beautiful. The three-finger salutes were done brilliantly and overall the casting was excellent. Without nitpicking, some of my complaints are the downplay of Cinna's role (and the prep), the visual darkness in the training arena, and the change in some of the parachutes. I noticed the lack of Haymitch being a paunchy, excessive drunk, but I can't complain much that they made him rather lovable eye candy.

    Side note: so glad they didn't make this a 3D abomination.
    monicaacinom: I'm distraught that you aren't a nihilistic Hi-C drinker.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    9,639
    I liked it. So much was really like I'd imagined it when I read the book.

    The camera work was quite annoying in a few scenes. But I suppose it was because they couldn't show much in the fighting parts for ratings reasons.
    Now the song is nearly over
    We may never find out what it means
    Still there's a light I hold before me
    You're the measure of my dreams
    The measure of my dreams

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    6,027
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by nillihc View Post
    The key to enjoying a movie adaptation is to think of it separately from the book, otherwise the inevitable changes can lead to great disappointment. The link discoverMC posted gives great comparisons. I thought movie was a good balance between the book and the cinematic elements necessary to visualize or shorten the plot. Since Suzanne Collins co-wrote and co-produced the film, I assume the changes as a whole are acceptable and will be weaved well into the following movies.

    As a PG-13 movie the battle scenes were understandably toned down; showing more realistic fighting wouldn't be as suitable for the younger audience. The poverty of the districts versus the overblown opulence of the Capitol was done well, plus the city itself was absolutely beautiful. The three-finger salutes were done brilliantly and overall the casting was excellent. Without nitpicking, some of my complaints are the downplay of Cinna's role (and the prep), the visual darkness in the training arena, and the change in some of the parachutes. I noticed the lack of Haymitch being a paunchy, excessive drunk, but I can't complain much that they made him rather lovable eye candy.

    Side note: so glad they didn't make this a 3D abomination.
    I put it in that perspective, which is what also made me hate it. So many scenes were inconsistently thrown together that if I hadn't read the book and watched it, I would have been confused. They lacked explaining any history of the games and they did a poor job of showing that Katniss and her family were starving. My friends that didn't read the book said it didn't make sense to them and was overrated, and I have to agree from their standpoint. The director took this in a terrible direction, plus the cinematography for such a big budget film did not live up to it's potential.
    RIP Dad. I miss you. <3

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    2,627
    Quote Originally Posted by iCYSPiCY View Post
    I put it in that perspective, which is what also made me hate it. So many scenes were inconsistently thrown together that if I hadn't read the book and watched it, I would have been confused. They lacked explaining any history of the games and they did a poor job of showing that Katniss and her family were starving. My friends that didn't read the book said it didn't make sense to them and was overrated, and I have to agree from their standpoint. The director took this in a terrible direction, plus the cinematography for such a big budget film did not live up to it's potential.
    That's a good point. I had trouble remembering who was who between the other tributes, so all the other details must've been lost on new viewers. I think the explanation of the games was sufficient at the beginning with the text, although they definitely didn't show much of the poverty and starvation. Overall, I think the storyline was simple enough to follow without prior knowledge and not knowing the plot beforehand does make the movie more engrossing in ways, but by lack of nuances part of the appeal of the book was left out. One of my friends made me read the books right before the movie came out - it's a good thing I did!
    monicaacinom: I'm distraught that you aren't a nihilistic Hi-C drinker.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Posts
    9,599
    I loved it until the games started, & then it was a huge let-down. It's so dramatic & tense in the book but I felt like the movie rushed through it, just dropped people like flies & then it was over. I know for time constraints/ratings it couldn't be that crazy, but there was hardly even any tension.

    I reread it this week, though, which made me more nitpicky. I think it's best for someone who has read it a while ago, so they know enough of the basic storyline to fill in the movie's gaps
    ♥καiℓεу♥
    11.29.04

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    2,977
    As someone who liked the books pretty well, but didn't obsess over them, I absolutely loved the movie. It was pretty much everything I wanted.
    Leah

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    6,027
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain_Jack_Sparrow View Post
    I loved it until the games started, & then it was a huge let-down. It's so dramatic & tense in the book but I felt like the movie rushed through it, just dropped people like flies & then it was over. I know for time constraints/ratings it couldn't be that crazy, but there was hardly even any tension.

    I reread it this week, though, which made me more nitpicky. I think it's best for someone who has read it a while ago, so they know enough of the basic storyline to fill in the movie's gaps
    Exactly my point! I felt no emotion...which is odd considering you are about to be fighting for your life!
    RIP Dad. I miss you. <3

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    12,636
    Quote Originally Posted by nillihc View Post
    The key to enjoying a movie adaptation is to think of it separately from the book, otherwise the inevitable changes can lead to great disappointment.
    this. part of the reason why i enjoyed the movie so much is because i read the books very quickly and i never had any attachment to them as books. collins is not a particularly inspiring writer, but her story was great and that's what kept me reading. whereas with harry potter, i spent a significant part of my childhood reading the books, waiting for them to come out and talking about them with my friends. when the movies came out i could always find a million things to criticize because i loved the books so much. i'm glad the movie had such a great opening weekend, because i can't remember the last time i saw a movie with an awesome female lead who wasn't wearing a skimpy costume.
    i cried when rue died.
    ad astra per aspera

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    2,783
    Quote Originally Posted by Idioteque View Post
    I actually liked it a lot. They got the right 'mood' for each place: the capitol, the districts, the arena, etc. I was also impressed by the lead actors, they were great.
    One thing: why no Madge? That was an odd omission.
    agreed with everything. i'm kinda upset that they didn't include a madge. cause that kinda means there won't be the whole "my aunt had this pin and was in the games" bit and that's disappointing. i also feel like during the movie, you really don't understand just how much peeta really loves katniss. they just kinda glazed over it and i didn't feel it i really enjoyed the movie though. i thought it was a good book to film adaptation

    also, they didn't make haymitch a huge drunk. (i.e. no falling at the reaping. sigh.) oh well

    also also, district 11 didn't give katniss the bread. instead they just lost their ****ing minds. i didn't like that either
    you think you're hot ****, but you're really just cold diarrhea.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:38 PM.