Unexpectedly impressed at the film as a whole. I've gotten a little jaded about amazing trailers being followed up by disappointing movies, but this was very enjoyable.
Quote from "GumOnShoe" »
I can't remember if this was true to the book completely or not. It seemed to be; although it was probably abbreviated in ways I just can't remember. There was a hubub about the ending of it, so that must have been changed slightly.
It's pretty dang spot on. A lot of the dialogue was even directly ported. The reason that there was probably a bit of hubbub about the ending is...
it was a massive cliffhanger in the book, and the movie skated over all the book's back-story about district 13, so it sort of comes off as out of the blue, and only serves to make the cliffhanger even more pronounced.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Proving god exists isn't hard. Proving god is God is the tricky part" - Roommate
There's a number of differences between the book and movie, most of them very understandable to keep the movie within length, to keep in continuation with the first film, and to keep the pace reasonable:
- They didn't mention Katniss' need to showcase her talent (or Peeta's painting) which means she works very closely with Cinna to develop her fashion talent.
- They dropped the backstory of Haymitch winning the 50th Hunger Games (2nd Quarter Quell), and in particular, the fact that it had double the number of contestants and the way in which he won.
- The mayor and his daughter were dropped in the first film, so naturally weren't in the second film, either.
- Bonnie and Twill (the people searching for District 13) were dropped completely.
- Gale gets punished for attacking a peacekeeper rather than bringing back wild game.
- The avoxes were present in the movie, but they don't go into much detail about them and certainly there isn't the same level of connection in the movie as in the books. Probably time and rating (keep it under R) issues at work.
- The fence was electrified again and Katniss needs to find a way around it.
- Plutarch doesn't show off his watch. Many people who haven't read the book said it sets up a better reveal anyway, since his motives aren't as clear; the twist at the end when he's shown on the hovercraft is more surprising.
- While they showed Peeta and Katniss' skills for the gamemakers, no scores this time around. It was a minor point that they got unbelievably high scores in the book, which made them bigger targets. In the movie, Haymitch simply notes that they're prime targets and need to make allies.
- Figuring out the clock was very quickly done in the movie; in the book it's drawn out for a long time.
- In the books, it's pretty apparent that Katniss is VERY tomboyish and her transformation both times that Cinna has to come by and change her is much more dramatic. This is just Hollywood at work here and the fact that Jennifer Lawrence is pretty and they're reluctant to make her ugly and hairy to clean her up for the pre-game interviews.
There were lots of little things like this, but it's a movie adaptation and I thought it was done well (in contrast, I've seen every Michael Crichton book made into a movie and some of those like Sphere and Congo were not very faithful, IMO).
People who are a little too worried about capturing everything from the book in the movies (*cough* LOTR fans *cough* sorry, but Tom Bombadil's exclusion is perfectly fine for the movie) need to remember that they're two very different mediums, so inner dialogue moments and narration by the author don't always translate well and not everyone has read the book and movies can't be 4-5 hours long to capture every little detail.
I thought this was a strong film adaptation of an enjoyable book. I completely agree that it is important to change books when converting to film due to the different nature of the medium. Also, JL is quite attractive.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"A little nonsense now and then is cherished by the wisest men."
- Willy Wonka
The Quote function doesn't work for me on this forum. Sorry for any confusion created.
As somebody who never read the book, I thought the movie was fantastic. One thing I wish they would have expanded on (in both this movie and the first), is the Katniss-Cinna relationship. They play off it as a very deep connection but I just don't see it.
The Japanese film Battle Royale ruined the Hunger Games for me.
That being said, Jennifer Lawrence is still awesome, so I might just watch it for her.
Is this a joke?
This thought process is lost upon me, it's like claiming you can't enjoy an action movie about a cop because Lethal Weapon or Die Hard or any number of cop movies ruined it for you. It's like claiming that since Snow White & The Seven Dwarves started the whole princess movie thing way back in the 30s you can't enjoy Frozen, Tangled, Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella or any other princess based movie.
Just because something is very similar to another thing does not prevent said thing from being worth it.
This coming from someone that saw Battle Royale first and enjoyed it quite a bit before seeing or reading anything about The Hunger Games.
Plus, The Hunger Games was apparently inspired by the myth of the minotaur, not battle royale.
I saw this last night and I gotta say I was actually floored. I'm big fan of the books and even knowing what was going to happen I still teared up a little bit in the manliest way I know how to.
I enjoyed it. I think, in terms of plotting, this one does a better job of capturing the feeling of being in this world, and it actually address the 'Hunger' part of the Hunger Games.
The Japanese film Battle Royale ruined the Hunger Games for me.
That being said, Jennifer Lawrence is still awesome, so I might just watch it for her.
I first saw Battle Royale at Otakon back in 2005, and must have watched the movie dozens of times. I've even read the book (not the manga, the original book). I've read the Hunger Games books and seen both movies, and I honestly can say I actually like both.
The two stories only share superficial similarities, unlike, say, The Condemned, which was more or less a straight up knock off with prisoners instead of students.
My Wife read the book and let me in on a few things that the movie missed that were key
Well that's easily explained by the fact that:
In the book, you can't actually see the arena. The moment you see the arena in the film it's pretty obvious whats going on, especially once the traps start going off.
Skipping the 'clock' hint allows Snow's character to remain more ambiguous and focus on the big twist, rather than the secret of the arena.
In the book, you can't actually see the arena. The moment you see the arena in the film it's pretty obvious whats going on, especially once the traps start going off.
Skipping the 'clock' hint allows Snow's character to remain more ambiguous and focus on the big twist, rather than the secret of the arena.
I think you meant Plutarch. In the book, you don't get the nice screen captures of the arena, but the main components of the watch, the ridges that lead to the center of the arena, are perfectly visible to all the tributes from their starting positions. Though it is unlikely that they would actually take the time to focus on something seemingly trivial and draw out all the possible implications when they're busy fighting for their lives.
Overall, I liked the movie. I haven't read the first book so I don't know how good of a job the first movie did, but the second one seemed like a very accurate adaptation with any differences being perfectly understandable and acceptable.
Also, I might be crucifying myself with this question, but I am the only person who doesn't think Jennifer Lawrence is particularly attractive, if at all?
Also, I might be crucifying myself with this question, but I am the only person who doesn't think Jennifer Lawrence is particularly attractive, if at all?
Nah, we're in the same boat on this
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Proving god exists isn't hard. Proving god is God is the tricky part" - Roommate
I think you meant Plutarch. In the book, you don't get the nice screen captures of the arena, but the main components of the watch, the ridges that lead to the center of the arena, are perfectly visible to all the tributes from their starting positions. Though it is unlikely that they would actually take the time to focus on something seemingly trivial and draw out all the possible implications when they're busy fighting for their lives.
Overall, I liked the movie. I haven't read the first book so I don't know how good of a job the first movie did, but the second one seemed like a very accurate adaptation with any differences being perfectly understandable and acceptable.
It was a better adaptation than the original, but the original's climax would have been harder to adapt.
Also, I might be crucifying myself with this question, but I am the only person who doesn't think Jennifer Lawrence is particularly attractive, if at all?
Really? I think she is better looking than most female actresses out there, if only because she doesn't look like a super model. She's got a very 'girl next door' vibe that a lot of people like.
But I don't think anyone cares whether or not you find her attractive. Her 'hotness' isn't the point of the film, and largely downplay her looks in the movies, or go for the 'weird' fashion of the capital.
I preferred the first movie. There was a lot more action in it and a lot less of the love story. I also hadn't read the books the first time and this time I noticed the discrepancies between the movie and the book.
That being said, Jennifer Lawrence is still awesome, so I might just watch it for her.
It's pretty dang spot on. A lot of the dialogue was even directly ported. The reason that there was probably a bit of hubbub about the ending is...
- They didn't mention Katniss' need to showcase her talent (or Peeta's painting) which means she works very closely with Cinna to develop her fashion talent.
- They dropped the backstory of Haymitch winning the 50th Hunger Games (2nd Quarter Quell), and in particular, the fact that it had double the number of contestants and the way in which he won.
- The mayor and his daughter were dropped in the first film, so naturally weren't in the second film, either.
- Bonnie and Twill (the people searching for District 13) were dropped completely.
- Gale gets punished for attacking a peacekeeper rather than bringing back wild game.
- The avoxes were present in the movie, but they don't go into much detail about them and certainly there isn't the same level of connection in the movie as in the books. Probably time and rating (keep it under R) issues at work.
- The fence was electrified again and Katniss needs to find a way around it.
- Plutarch doesn't show off his watch. Many people who haven't read the book said it sets up a better reveal anyway, since his motives aren't as clear; the twist at the end when he's shown on the hovercraft is more surprising.
- While they showed Peeta and Katniss' skills for the gamemakers, no scores this time around. It was a minor point that they got unbelievably high scores in the book, which made them bigger targets. In the movie, Haymitch simply notes that they're prime targets and need to make allies.
- Figuring out the clock was very quickly done in the movie; in the book it's drawn out for a long time.
- In the books, it's pretty apparent that Katniss is VERY tomboyish and her transformation both times that Cinna has to come by and change her is much more dramatic. This is just Hollywood at work here and the fact that Jennifer Lawrence is pretty and they're reluctant to make her ugly and hairy to clean her up for the pre-game interviews.
There were lots of little things like this, but it's a movie adaptation and I thought it was done well (in contrast, I've seen every Michael Crichton book made into a movie and some of those like Sphere and Congo were not very faithful, IMO).
People who are a little too worried about capturing everything from the book in the movies (*cough* LOTR fans *cough* sorry, but Tom Bombadil's exclusion is perfectly fine for the movie) need to remember that they're two very different mediums, so inner dialogue moments and narration by the author don't always translate well and not everyone has read the book and movies can't be 4-5 hours long to capture every little detail.
- Willy Wonka
The Quote function doesn't work for me on this forum. Sorry for any confusion created.
BGStandard Green AggroGB
UWRGModern Saheeli CobraGRWU
UBRGLegacy StormGRBU
Wizards Certified Rules Advisor
Is this a joke?
This thought process is lost upon me, it's like claiming you can't enjoy an action movie about a cop because Lethal Weapon or Die Hard or any number of cop movies ruined it for you. It's like claiming that since Snow White & The Seven Dwarves started the whole princess movie thing way back in the 30s you can't enjoy Frozen, Tangled, Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella or any other princess based movie.
Just because something is very similar to another thing does not prevent said thing from being worth it.
This coming from someone that saw Battle Royale first and enjoyed it quite a bit before seeing or reading anything about The Hunger Games.
Feel free to bid on my cards here!
I saw this last night and I gotta say I was actually floored. I'm big fan of the books and even knowing what was going to happen I still teared up a little bit in the manliest way I know how to.
I first saw Battle Royale at Otakon back in 2005, and must have watched the movie dozens of times. I've even read the book (not the manga, the original book). I've read the Hunger Games books and seen both movies, and I honestly can say I actually like both.
The two stories only share superficial similarities, unlike, say, The Condemned, which was more or less a straight up knock off with prisoners instead of students.
TerribleBad at Magic since 1998.A Vorthos Guide to Magic Story | Twitter | Tumblr
[Primer] Krenko | Azor | Kess | Zacama | Kumena | Sram | The Ur-Dragon | Edgar Markov | Daretti | Marath
One being:
When Katniss and Snow are dancing and Snow hints at a clock
Overall, better than the first - a lot faster. The first had some slow and stale moments. Such a cliffhanger......
I buy HP and Damaged cards!
Only EDH:
Sigarda, Host of Herons: Enchantress' Enchantments
Jenara, Asura of War: ETB Value Town
Purphoros, God of the Forge: Global Punishment
Xenagos, God of Revels: Ramp, Sneak, & Heavy Hitters
Ghave, Guru of Spores: Dies_to_Doom_Blade's stax list
Edric, Spymaster of Trest: Donald's list
Well that's easily explained by the fact that:
Skipping the 'clock' hint allows Snow's character to remain more ambiguous and focus on the big twist, rather than the secret of the arena.
TerribleBad at Magic since 1998.A Vorthos Guide to Magic Story | Twitter | Tumblr
[Primer] Krenko | Azor | Kess | Zacama | Kumena | Sram | The Ur-Dragon | Edgar Markov | Daretti | Marath
I think you meant Plutarch. In the book, you don't get the nice screen captures of the arena, but the main components of the watch, the ridges that lead to the center of the arena, are perfectly visible to all the tributes from their starting positions. Though it is unlikely that they would actually take the time to focus on something seemingly trivial and draw out all the possible implications when they're busy fighting for their lives.
Overall, I liked the movie. I haven't read the first book so I don't know how good of a job the first movie did, but the second one seemed like a very accurate adaptation with any differences being perfectly understandable and acceptable.
Also, I might be crucifying myself with this question, but I am the only person who doesn't think Jennifer Lawrence is particularly attractive,
if at all?Nah, we're in the same boat on this
Thank you! I did mean Plutarch.
It was a better adaptation than the original, but the original's climax would have been harder to adapt.
Really? I think she is better looking than most female actresses out there, if only because she doesn't look like a super model. She's got a very 'girl next door' vibe that a lot of people like.
But I don't think anyone cares whether or not you find her attractive. Her 'hotness' isn't the point of the film, and largely downplay her looks in the movies, or go for the 'weird' fashion of the capital.
TerribleBad at Magic since 1998.A Vorthos Guide to Magic Story | Twitter | Tumblr
[Primer] Krenko | Azor | Kess | Zacama | Kumena | Sram | The Ur-Dragon | Edgar Markov | Daretti | Marath
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
The story and the movie itself is trash, imo. I am happy that I did not have to pay to watch the film.