The Hunger Games

[ashdenej]

I recently realised there wasn't a thread for discussing the Hunger Games - it seems worthwhile to have a thread out there, both for discussing the books and the film adaptations.

Fire away!

[Quirk]

It wasn't nearly as good the second time around. The logic problems really creep up on you.

[ashdenej]

You mean these?

There is no conceivable way Panem could survive seventy-four years, much less seven. For the following reasons, among many.

• Distict 12 is the primary coal producer of Panem. Fine. It also has a population of ~ 8000. That is less than my own home county. Heck, my po-dunk middle of nowhere hometown makes up three quarters of that number. There is no way that 8000 people can support the coal necessary for a country.
• Avoxi. They are traitors, rebels, and political prisoners, who are then used as servants for high-priority clientele. And all they do is cut out their tongues. And the primary surveillance technique is bugging. Which does jack shit against people who would use sign language. I wouldn't put those people anywhere near my leadership, even if I had them lobotomised.
• The only connection between the Capitol and Disctrict 12 is that rail line. District 12 doesn't much like the Capitol. During the choosing, someone could easily start a mob, overpower the Peacekeepers, disable the train and rail, kill the representative, and then flee to the east coast or Canada before the Capitol could react. Because they don't seem to have an air force, and there is literally nothing stopping the populace from just getting up and moving.
• Apparently rebels hiding in mountains are easy to pick out and kill. I guess that explains why wars in Afghanistan are always over so quickly and with minimal loss of life OHWAIT.
• What in the hell happened to everyone else, i.e. China, Mexico, Canada, India, European nations, etc?
• The economics of District 12 are completely whacked in too many ways to count. Sugar is a luxury. Then how the fuck is there a candy store that is apparently profitable enough to be a candy store?
• There's a long string of bits and pieces that the only reason that people are starving is because their either scared (which they have no reason to be, Panem is brutally incompetent) or because they are completely stupid (more likely). If they really were starving, the land would be completely stripped of pretty much everything and they'd be eating boiled grass. But no. There are dandelions growing within the fence. And why no chickens? She claims chickens were expensive. PAH! Not nearly as expensive as that pig of Peeta's, who just so happens to consume human food and has a massive caloric intake compared to chickens. They should literally be drowning in chickens.
• None of the kids in the Games are actually starving. Katniss is far too tall and strong, and many of the other ones are described as being rather big. Growing big and strong is part of a healthy diet and not starving. Even Rue, who is described as being maybe 70 pounds, is still within acceptable range for her age.
• Making your citizens miserable incites rebellion, you dunkasses! If you're going to do it, pull a North Korea and make it so that they don't realize how miserable they are!

there are more, but these are the ones that come to mind.

I have a couple of issues with the list, but they like fair enough objections for somebody to make.

[Quirk]

You mean these?
I have a couple of issues with the list, but they like fair enough objections for somebody to make.

Yeah. I'll fully admit not all of those were thought out very well, but there are other little things. I mean, they're enjoyable enough books, but she has some problems with worldbuilding, research flubs, and protagonist-centered morality.

It could be worse, though.

[ashdenej]

Yeah. I'll fully admit not all of those were thought out very well, but there are other little things. I mean, they're enjoyable enough books, but she has some problems with worldbuilding, research flubs, and protagonist-centered morality.

It could be worse, though.

I was always rather annoyed by the limitations that a consistent single first-person perspective brought. You felt you missed things out - which, in a way, is a good thing, because it feels as if there's other stuff going on and a world still turning without Katniss.

I also really needed closure once I finished the books. They went by too rapidly and kind of didn't tie up all the loose ends, perhaps?

Some of your objections don't really come into the focus of the story (what happened to the other countries etc) because it's from an apolicical girl's point of view. Others - why Katniss isn't starving etc - were because of in-story explanations (i.e. that she hunts with a partner, practically uniquely in the District). I dunno.

[Quirk]

I was always rather annoyed by the limitations that a consistent single first-person perspective brought. You felt you missed things out - which, in a way, is a good thing, because it feels as if there's other stuff going on and a world still turning without Katniss.

Yeah, for me, since I ended up asking myself "Wait...how does Panem work?" repeatedly, it sort of made the world seem a bit fake to me. When I read it (and mind you, I've only read the first, so that counts against me) it didn't feel like there was really any world beyond Katniss: like the setting was a cardboard backdrop for her to act out her story. Which I guess is why I question about other countries: I want to see some sign that there is really a world there.

EDIT: Though not to sound like a total whiner, I do like how Katniss handles the Careers' food store. That was clever.

EDIT EDIT: On the hunting, why don't more people do it? The peacekeepers can be bought off, and if they really are starving, more than two people will risk punishment for a full belly. It just seems really easy to do, and if Panem wanted to really discourage it (and foster dependency), they could just render the surrounding wilderness barren for fifty miles in any direction.

[Darlos9D]

I've only seen the movie. I thought the lead-up to the games were really cool and full of interesting moments and tension, but the games themselves were kind of a cop-out for reasons that pretty much anybody with half a brain noticed. Namely: it's kind of hard to make a moral quandry out of a situation where the good guy never has to fight or kill anybody besides blatant assholes.

Also, shaky cam. Oh god shaky cam.

Remember when Indiana Jones with EXPLODING PEOPLE AND MELTING FACES was PG? What the hell happened...

[DizzzyZebra]

Decent books I found. Not my favourites but quite the page-turners. Even if the world isn't quite well-developed and the loose ends were still hanging around. They have some of my respect for having such an increase in the quality of morals portrayed compared to the previous teen-hit-stuff I have seen recently. I would be happy to get out of the 'love is the only thing that motivates anyone' trend too.

[ilikeoctopus]

I liked the first two books. The last book was a bit of a disaster. Why go through all that trouble just to end that way...? It was rather depressing, and was not satisfying at all to me.
The movie, though? I really only have a few words to say about it. Seneca Crane's beard.

[Obselescence]

Felt kind of weird that the movie didn't really focus much on the "Katniss is just pretending to like Peeta so she'll get sponsor packages" angle. Considering it was the plot of the second book.

[ashdenej]

Felt kind of weird that the movie didn't really focus much on the "Katniss is just pretending to like Peeta so she'll get sponsor packages" angle. Considering it was the plot of the second book.

I suppose it's difficult to get inside somebody's head, mm. But I did like the fact that the film cut its limitations and allowed focus on the Gamemakers etc.

Quirk, you're probably feeling that there's no greater world because you haven't read the later books, yeah. It gets better! And then some would say that the third might be a bit of a let down, mm.

[ilikeoctopus]

I suppose it's difficult to get inside somebody's head, mm. But I did like the fact that the film cut its limitations and allowed focus on the Gamemakers etc.

It was a bit... troubling to me that the film did not transition very well to third person, since a lot of the books' appeal was Katniss's reaction to the events, I think. It felt a bit more empty.

[kholhaus]

I am scared to see the movie, based on everyone's non-spoileriffic (wait what the hell am I saying I read the book) descriptions of it.

What the hell.
The HUNGER GAMES. Kids locked in DEUDLY COMBAT.
KIDS AND FUN. Not Kids and... Fun.

I want the feel from the books.

[Rhapsody]

Felt kind of weird that the movie didn't really focus much on the "Katniss is just pretending to like Peeta so she'll get sponsor packages" angle. Considering it was the plot of the second book.

Exactly what I was thinking. Also the movie can be a little bit confusing if you hadn't already read the books.

It was a bit... troubling to me that the film did not transition very well to third person, since a lot of the books' appeal was Katniss's reaction to the events, I think. It felt a bit more empty.

^This.
In the books, you have Katniss' explanations and views. You know why she did something, etc etc etc. In the movie, you don't.

Which all strengthens my belief that the books are always, ALWAYS better than their movie counterparts.

[CryCold]

Read the books, have not yet seen the movie and it's starting to annoy me that I have to act as a apologist for them.

Mostly people's reactions to the franchise range from, "bawwwww my sci-fi isn't hard enough" to "the writing is just sensationalist with no substance," to even, "It's just Battle Royale". I guess I can agree with the second point a little. Virginia Wolfe she is not. Regardless I think that writing a book that most people cannot put down is a significant literary accomplishment even if it won't get someone to write dissertations about her 100 years from now.

In regards to, "It's just Battle Royale," seriously? I haven't read the Battle Royale yet (it's on the list) so I'll try not to pass judgement but everything I've read about it suggests that the book's primary project is to illustrate the abuse the old inflict on the young. The Hunger Games' project was to talk about how people under Media scrutiny use it to their advantage or disadvantage. It is my belief that the gladiator style, kill em all setting was incidental since, you know, we have had ACTUAL GLADIATORS in our history. No idea is original.

And as for "Bawww how does the universe work?" that's not the point and you know it. If it bothers you that much complain that not enough people are educated about Science but don't take that as a fault of the book. This is not Hard Sci-Fi, and honestly, to use jargon, dat shit don' matta.

[ashdenej]

Things

Whoops I agree with CryCold. If you're complaining about how the Capitol didn't suppress people right - by making them content - then you've rather missed the point of the books.

Likewise if you say "I could do better", mm.

Frankly, I think the film managed the transition from book to screen extremely well. There are always some things that you're not going to be able to see, but the film compensated very well - not much was taken away from the experience by having notes on the packages rather than Katniss' thought process. I suppose it might make her seem a little less smart, but wweh. It's a trade-off.

[OldManRupee]

Just watched the film! Haven't read the books and managed to stay spoiler free, so I went in with an open mind:
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S
I was surprised how hooked I was. Especially the whole question of "is the relationship real or just for the cameras?" aspect, it was pretty obvious that Katniss was playing the media game, but Peeta's feelings seemed genuine. Interested to see where it leads in the sequel. Loved the bits outside the arena as well, the commentators and smarmy tv host guy was spot on perfect.

The bit with Ro had me tearing up. And the reaction from her district, great stuff. Moving. Hehe, it was funny seeing how pretty much every kill made by Katniss could in some way be classed as "self defence" or "not her fault", good guys gotta stay good I guess!

As for the whole world-building stuff, I think the film played it right by keeping things vague, then you could fill in the gaps with your own assumptions.
S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S

[liquidMountain]

I would watch the movie, but apparently the worst thing is SHUCKIN' FAKYCAM.

[Varkarrus]

Remember when Indiana Jones with EXPLODING PEOPLE AND MELTING FACES was PG? What the hell happened...

I remember not being THAT young when first watching it and it still terrified me and gave me nightmares

[curiousTerminal]

Shakycam only happens in fight scenes, from what I remember, but it is pretty noticeable.

[Darlos9D]

Shakycam only happens in fight scenes, from what I remember, but it is pretty noticeable.

It's godawful is what it is. And you know, at first, I thought maybe there was some train of thought in modern film making where they believed shakey cam is actually cool or something. But my friend and I finally figured out that you only see shakey cam really bad in "violent" movies that are PG-13 or less. They do BECAUSE they want to obscure the violence, because that let's them get away with a lower rating while still technically "showing" it.

Problem is, it bothers the shit out of everybody.

I remember not being THAT young when first watching it and it still terrified me and gave me nightmares

It did me too. (well maybe not the nightmares exactly, but...) And you know what? I wouldn't change that for the world. It didn't turn me into a deranged psychopath or send me into a catatonic state. Now it's just a funny memory. Sometimes entertainment can be scary and disturbing, even for kids! Trying to keep our kids ignorant of scary badness for as long as inhumanly possible doesn't really save anybody from anything, and stifles entertainment. It's something that's really been pissing me off about modern society.

[Dentrala]

Wow really? I thought shakycam was very effective because in those scenes in the book katniss is all whatthehellisgoingonahhhhhhh

[ashdenej]

Wow really? I thought shakycam was very effective because in those scenes in the book katniss is all whatthehellisgoingonahhhhhhh

Yeah, that was the only time when it was noticeable to me. And it was really effective - according to my sister, it was a very accurate representation of being stinking drunk.

Other than that, it wasn't really evident? I thought it was good when it was present, though.

[Darlos9D]

The job of a movie is to either show you whats happening or not, not to half-ass it and give you a headache in the process. I don't want to see things like I'm stinking drunk, unless the character is actually stinking drunk and we're having one of those "seeing through their eyes" moments. Yeah sure, shakey cam didn't happen often in the movie because it wasn't needed often, but that doesn't excuse it.

And maybe you could make the argument that it emulates the chaos in Katniss' head or something, but that doesn't really explain other movies like the latest Batman movies or the Bourne movies where the characters are clearly experienced and focused combatants. And those are all PG-13 movies. Hrm, how about that.

It's an overall trend and I don't like it. Hunger Games doesn't get a special pass, especially since I don't think it was done for any actual artistic reason like is being suggested here. It was just done to obscure the violence because of the rating. Bleh.

[Axillary]

Shakycam is awful. It costs at least $10 to see a fucking movie in theater, and god help you if you see something on IMAX or whatever. If I wanted to see a movie filmed by a six year old child who is too small to hold the camera steady, or a moron waving around an iphone, I would stay home and watch youtube videos. What is the point of high-definition 3d IMAX blu-ray hyperthreading technicolor virtual reality goddamn $22 smellovision visual madness if the entire screen is a fucking blur? It's complete bullshit. Man, I got a little carried away there. My point is that motion is fine, but whipping the camera around like you're trying to break its neck really makes me want to break yours. Honestly I think it's lazy filmmaking.

Nevertheless, Hunger Games was good, especially when they stopped doing that thing I just said. I haven't read the books and knew only the basic premise going in, so I have no opinion on the adaptation. I thought it was a good story. Funny enough, it was perfectly clear to me that Katnip was just hamming up her feelings for The Boy so that a flying fortune cookie would come give her a present. Every scene they were in together was awkward as fuck because each of them were trying to figure out if the other was sincere. She clearly wasn't, and towards the end it became clear that he was. I still don't know who that sulking dude in Katniss' hometown was or why they kept showing him pout at her image onscreen. Maybe he was sad that he didn't have any more lines.

The thing that pisses me off the most about this movie is apparently many jackasses were/are whining about the casting because a couple of characters were black. "Oh no, what if black people exist in the dystopian future! Eww everything is ruined!" Wow, eat shit you hateful fucks. Anyway, that little girl was the most adorable ninja ever.

Remember when Indiana Jones with EXPLODING PEOPLE AND MELTING FACES was PG? What the hell happened...

Dude I know. Ratings are completely inconsistent, especially over time. People are pretty uptight these days.