Hunger Games = Steaming Piles of Dung

[Tisket]

I guess I shouldn't go to a movie that's based on books for tweens and be surprised at the gaping flaws in plot and wooden acting, but I was. What a waste of two hours.

THERE ARE SPOILERS INCLUDED IN SOME OF THE FOLLOWING POSTS IN THIS THREAD. YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED

[BriarFox]

I still don't understand how this movie broke so many profit records. Maybe it's simply a product of phenomenal advertising and the fact that there's a blank abyss of good films out at the moment.

[TheEschaton]

I had never even heard of Hunger Games til like, a week and a half ago. I can't understand it being like the highest grossing 3 day opener ever either.

[Warriorbird]

Watch Battle Royale, The Running Man, or read The Long Walk. Done.

[crb]

I guess I shouldn't go to a movie that's based on books for tweens and be surprised at the gaping flaws in plot and wooden acting, but I was. What a waste of two hours.
To be fair... Harry Potter got pretty decent.

I haven't seen this yet though, so you're saying its like Twilight?

[Warriorbird]

To be fair... Harry Potter got pretty decent.

I haven't seen this yet though, so you're saying its like Twilight?

Yes, but most anything is.

[Deathravin]

I guess I shouldn't go to a movie that's based on books for tweens and be surprised at the gaping flaws in plot and wooden acting, but I was. What a waste of two hours.

Did you read the books?

[Tisket]

To be fair... Harry Potter got pretty decent.

I haven't seen this yet though, so you're saying its like Twilight?

I disliked Twilight too for pretty much the same reasons I guess. Actors whose only acting talent seems to be to look sullen and disgruntled.

Hunger Games gives us the added bonus that most of the civilized world dresses like Cindy Lauper.

Also, the tributes (kids sent to play Survivor) make stupid, obvious mistakes (building a fire, no camo, getting treed, having a ranged weapon THAT YOU DON'T USE TO KILL ENEMIES AT A DISTANCE, stupid eye-catching garb when your'e trying to skulk and hide, etc. etc. etc.)

I did enjoy Harry Potter though, I'll give you that.

[Tisket]

Did you read the books?

No. Would that have improved a poorly directed movie?

[Celephais]

I disliked Twilight too for pretty much the same reasons I guess. Actors whose only acting talent seems to be to look sullen and disgruntled.

Hunger Games gives us the added bonus that most of the civilized world dresses like Cindy Lauper.

Also, the tributes (kids sent to play Survivor) make stupid, obvious mistakes (building a fire, no camo, getting treed, having a ranged weapon THAT YOU DON'T USE TO KILL ENEMIES AT A DISTANCE, stupid eye-catching garb when your'e trying to skulk and hide, etc. etc. etc.)

I did enjoy Harry Potter though, I'll give you that.

I got a free pass to go see it, I thought it was ... not unenjoyable, but by no means good.

The Cindy Lauper dress I thought of more as a 5th element wardrobe, but they were actually trying to be serious instead of funny. And Lenny Kravitz played Chris Tucker.

The combat was just awful, what the fuck was the guy who killed the little black girl's plan (more on names in a minute), he threw his only fucking weapon immediately, when fighting two people ... what was he going to do, laugh the other girl to death!?!

The names were just fucking terrible, why can't anyone have a normal name...

The only person who came close was Peter, but they couldn't even get that right, I don't know how they spell it in the book but they didn't pronounce it right once. There he is, pretending to be part of the "group" holding a spear, helping them hunt down cat, when all three of them line up infront of him .... SKEWER THE SHIT OUT OF THEM.

Fuck man, you spend your whole lives knowing about these games, there's no such thing as being too chickenshit to do what's needed if you live in that world.

Who goes to the gourd, knowing everyone needs whatever's there, and only grabs your bag ... if you are daring a run to get whatever they gave you, TAKE ALL THE BAGS, you might not need it, it might be useful, but best off you fucked over someone else. (My guess is that District 2 needed some Plan B).

They can use technology to manifest super wolves that are capable of physically interacting with and mutilating people, why the shit don't they use these to control the populace instead of guards in outfits straight out of Space Balls.

Was I supposed to be sad when the little black girl died? They hardly developed her character (I'm sure in the book it was much better), but the movie tried to make it so epic, yet I had zero attachment to her because the second they introduced her I knew she had to die, and they they hardly even developed her.

So yeah, I wasn't impressed. I could probably rant a bit longer but that's good.

[Gelston]

Was I supposed to be sad when the little black girl died? ...the second they introduced her I knew she had to die....


Racist.

[Celephais]

Racist.

Black girl in a world filled with neighborhood watch, done for.

Speaking of:
http://jezebel.com/5896408/racist-hunger-games-fans-dont-care-how-much-money-the-movie-made

That's why I hate people ... because they hate people.

[Nilandia]

So yeah, I wasn't impressed. I could probably rant a bit longer but that's good.
Several of the things you point to are actually differences between the book and the movie, or things that weren't made very clear. I'll give it a try to explain some. For the record, I thought the movie was entertaining but not ZOMGAWESOME. The book was better, but also not the best thing ever. Just offering these things for clarity. Fair warning, there will be some spoilers. It's also long, since I'd just seen the movie yesterday and finished reading the book earlier that day, and details are fresh in my mind.


The Cindy Lauper dress I thought of more as a 5th element wardrobe, but they were actually trying to be serious instead of funny. And Lenny Kravitz played Chris Tucker.
I always took this as making the contrast between the affluence of the Capitol and the 12th District that much starker. The rich people can afford to chase after things that bizarre while the districts fight to survive. Lenny Kravitz's look is actually straight out of the book. Katniss was expecting someone looking as ridiculous as the other stylists, when all he has is a bit of gold eyeliner.


The combat was just awful, what the fuck was the guy who killed the little black girl's plan (more on names in a minute), he threw his only fucking weapon immediately, when fighting two people ... what was he going to do, laugh the other girl to death!?!
It's actually different, and in my opinion significantly better, in the book. Rue is pinned in the net, but the other boy is in the act of spearing her when Katniss shows up. He then takes an arrow to the throat.


The names were just fucking terrible, why can't anyone have a normal name...
Many of the names are Roman, which would hint to the influence of gladiatorial games upon the storyline. Cato, Cinna, Caesar the TV guy, Claudius, Seneca the guy who ran the games, etc. I didn't hear it in the movie, but President Snow's first name is Coriolanus, also Roman.


The only person who came close was Peter, but they couldn't even get that right, I don't know how they spell it in the book but they didn't pronounce it right once.
His name is actually Peeta Mellark in both the book and the movie.


There he is, pretending to be part of the "group" holding a spear, helping them hunt down cat, when all three of them line up infront of him .... SKEWER THE SHIT OUT OF THEM.
Can't speak to why he did what he did in the movie, but in the book it's made very clear that Peeta joined the group to direct them away from Katniss and keep her safe.


Who goes to the gourd, knowing everyone needs whatever's there, and only grabs your bag ... if you are daring a run to get whatever they gave you, TAKE ALL THE BAGS, you might not need it, it might be useful, but best off you fucked over someone else. (My guess is that District 2 needed some Plan B).
That was actually one of the things I was disappointed about with the movie. In the book, Thresh, the big black guy from district 11, takes his bag and the one for district 2. For some reason that wasn't made clear in the movie.


They can use technology to manifest super wolves that are capable of physically interacting with and mutilating people, why the shit don't they use these to control the populace instead of guards in outfits straight out of Space Balls.
Agreed, that didn't make much sense to me, either. For me, that part was actually a lot creepier in the book. The creatures are actually called muttations, which makes me think they're genetically engineered like the mockingjays and tracker jackers (wasps), rather than simply called up out of nowhere.

The gamemakers (I'm always trying to read that as gamemasters) had shut off all water except for a lake near the cornucopia to force Cato, Peeta and Katniss together for the big showdown. Peeta and Katniss get there first, when Cato suddenly bursts out of the forests trying to escape the creatures. Katniss takes a shot at him, but it's deflected off of his body armor, and the muttations chase them all on top of the cornucopia, with Peeta taking a severe wound to the leg that will have to amputated later.

The muttations are not just dog-like creatures, however. They're huge, but are also able to stand on their hind legs and seem to have a level of sentience. Katniss noticed that their eyes were not canine, but seemed human. She then realized that each of the creatures had the features of one of the tributes that had already died, including a small black-haired one like Rue.

Cato regained his strength and took Peeta hostage like in the book, but Peeta drew an X in his own blood on Cato's hand to draw Katniss' attention. When Cato fell, he was still wearing his body armor, so the muttations attacked him for several hours. The whole time, Peeta is in danger of bleeding to death because of his leg wound. Katniss makes a makeshift tourniquet using her shirt sleeve and her last arrow, but in the end, she has to remove it to shoot Cato in the head and (she thinks) end the games.


Was I supposed to be sad when the little black girl died? They hardly developed her character (I'm sure in the book it was much better), but the movie tried to make it so epic, yet I had zero attachment to her because the second they introduced her I knew she had to die, and they they hardly even developed her.
Rue did have significantly more character development in the book, yes. She's not a fragile character by any stretch despite being so young. She's smart, practically at home in the treetops, seeming able to disappear into the shadows at will, and though she doesn't have hunting experience, she's very familiar with the plants since she came from an agricultural district. She and Katniss spend a bit of time talking about their respective lives as well.

For my part, there were several differences from the book I noticed that I didn't much care for.

Woody Harrelson's character, Haymitch, is supposed to have taken a nosedive off of the platform at the Reaping in the beginning, because he's so drunk. I was looking forward to seeing that, along with playing up him being smashed all of the time until Katniss and Peeta impress him enough with a desire to live that he makes a deal to stay sober enough to train them if they listen to him.

The ending is significantly happier in the movie than in the book, where Haymitch betrays to Peeta that the whole 'star-crossed lovers' bit was just a ploy for Katniss to garner support. Peeta is heart-broken, while Katniss' feelings are rather mixed at this point. The book ends just as Katniss and Peeta arrive back in district 12, and they're about to face the crowd while having to maintain their facade.

A lot of small details were never explained that gave the story a lot of depth. The three-finger gesture/salute that you see a couple times is explained as being a gesture of solidarity, and that the people of district 12 use that instead of applauding for Katniss volunteering is an act of rebellion that's never clarified in the movie.

At the same time, mockingjays are also a small anti-government detail that never gets touched upon. During the rebellion that led to the creation of the Hunger Games, birds were genetically engineered to be able to listen to the rebels' conversations, return to the government, and repeat them to pass on information on the rebels' plans. However, the rebels figured it out and started feeding them false information. Afterward, the birds interbred with the native population to create the mockingjays that, while not able to reproduce human speech to the same degree, do repeat certain tones like is shown in the movie. The mockingjay then becomes a symbol of rebellion against the government, and Katniss having a pin with the bird is a subtle jab against the Capitol.

The rebellion of district 11 doesn't happen anywhere in the book. Instead, when Rue dies, Katniss receives a loaf of bread from a sponsor. From her time spent with Peeta, the baker's son, she recognizes the bread as coming from district 11. It's the first known time that a district sent aid to a tribute of another district, and she thanks them to communicate that she knows who it came from.

Those were the biggest differences I noticed that I wished had been more faithful to the book. There were others, but they were far less consequential.

There are other parts of the movie that differed from the book that I did like. For example, forcing the head gamemaker to commit suicide using the same berries Katniss and Peeta used wasn't in the book, but it was a nice touch. I did like giving President Snow a greater role. You can't waste Donald Sutherland on such a small part that the book gives.

Anyway, I've gone on way too long. Apologies for TL;DR.

Gretchen

[Lord Orbstar]

for the crowd it was made for it was a good movie. I enjoyed it more knowing how much my preteen and teen daughters were loving it. Ya. Dad time.

[Drunken Durfin]

No. Would that have improved a poorly directed movie?

If you have not read the books then you have every right to be pissed about the movie experience. I don't see how anyone who has not read them could sit through the film and not have a WTF moment every two minutes.

I read all three books in three days, you can breeze through them quite easily, they were written for high school kids after all. Having read them before I saw the movie I must say that the film was one of the best book to screen adaptations I have seen. There were minor changes, but all in all they stayed very true to the story.

[Drunken Durfin]

Apologies for TL;DR.

Not to mention a passel of spoilers!

[Tenlaar]

Fair warning, there will be some spoilers.

^

[Kitsun]

I read the first book the day before I watched the movie. I enjoyed the book a bit more than the movie but I'm pretty sure the book is almost required reading before watching the movie. It isn't that they did a poor job on the adaptation but a lot of the book was devoted to Kat's headspace that translates pretty poorly to the big screen. Just can't fit in all the emotional development and the movie was already 2.5 hours long.

I sat next to two people who must've gotten dragged in by the hype because the opening night crowd went wild at certain points and the two people next to me were literally going, "Why is everyone cheering?"

[Drunken Durfin]

^

No fair...that was hidden amongst the wall of text.

[Drunken Durfin]

I sat next to two people who must've gotten dragged in by the hype because the opening night crowd went wild at certain points and the two people next to me were literally going, "Why is everyone cheering?"

There were several pockets of these types of folks in our theater as well. They laughed/cheered at all the wrong points.

[Tisket]

No fair...that was hidden amongst the wall of text.

I edited the OP to include a spoiler warning for subsequent posts.

[Tenlaar]

No fair...that was hidden amongst the wall of text.

I don't think you're allowed to not read the first paragraph of a post and then complain about spoilers further in.

[Tisket]

I don't think you're allowed to not read the first paragraph of a post and then complain about spoilers further in.

That's how we roll here.

[Tisket]

I read the first book the day before I watched the movie. I enjoyed the book a bit more than the movie but I'm pretty sure the book is almost required reading before watching the movie. It isn't that they did a poor job on the adaptation but a lot of the book was devoted to Kat's headspace that translates pretty poorly to the big screen. Just can't fit in all the emotional development and the movie was already 2.5 hours long.

We'll have to disagree on this. If a director and screenwriter are so incompetent that they can't convey a story without requiring viewers to first read the source material in order to understand what's going on then they should get a new director and screenwriter for the sequels.

[Drunken Durfin]

I don't think you're allowed to not read the first paragraph of a post and then complain about spoilers further in.

I only read half of the forum rules, I started in the middle and went down there too. That part must have been toward the top.

[Celephais]

Several of the things you point to are actually differences between the book and the movie, or things that weren't made very clear.

While I did actually really appreciate the breakdown you gave, I didn't expect the movie to get everything right, but I do expect movies to stand on their own. While watching the movie, especially the Rue part, I had several occasions where I just broke immersion and thought "I bet they do a much better job in the book with this, and now I'm going to have to hear about it from Mike" (I've got a friend who's a huge read the book before the movie guy, he had no interest in the series til he heard they were making a movie on it and then powered through the books). Another thing I thought as I was watching was "This should be rated R, I bet the book would be R rated" then I went off on a tangent in my head about how stupid censorship in america is because it's perfectly fine for kids to read violence because it's not like the parents are going to read it.


I always took this as making the contrast between the affluence of the Capitol and the 12th District that much starker. The rich people can afford to chase after things that bizarre while the districts fight to survive.
While I got the point of it, they looked like parodies of every intentionally stupid "hey I'm from the future" character. It just felt uncreative and embarrassing.


Can't speak to why he did what he did in the movie, but in the book it's made very clear that Peeta joined the group to direct them away from Katniss and keep her safe.
I got the impression he wasn't trying to actually find her in the movie, but the whole premise seemed stupid, before going in he announced that he had a crush on her, why would they trust him in their group, to say "he's the best at finding her cause he knows her" is pretty dumb. I got over that a lot easier than I got over the fact that he was in a perfect position to get a triple kill with one thrust, and save Kat at the same time.


That was actually one of the things I was disappointed about with the movie. In the book, Thresh, the big black guy from district 11, takes his bag and the one for district 2. For some reason that wasn't made clear in the movie./quote]
That's good to hear that the book at least got that right.

[quote]The gamemakers (I'm always trying to read that as gamemasters) had shut off all water except for a lake near the cornucopia to force Cato, Peeta and Katniss together for the big showdown.
I got that the gamemakers were supposed to make the game actually take place (instead of everyone just hugging it out), but I got annoyed when they decided to start shooting fireballs at Kat, if they had got her with one it would have made for a terribly stupid "game" when one of the favorites just gets incinerated without actually participating. Felt very reverse deus ex machina (or non-reverse for the other competitors I guess).



Rue did have significantly more character development in the book, yes.
Yea as expected, shockingly so, another moment where if I was getting any immersion at all (I really wasn't) it would have been broken with a "there's got to be a lot more to that". I think they spent about as long show Kat being sad as they did developing Rue.

[TheEschaton]

After reading that TLDR post, I am now even more glad I have no idee what The Hunger Games are.

[Celephais]

We'll have to disagree on this. If a director and screenwriter are so incompetent that they can't convey a story without requiring viewers to first read the source material in order to understand what's going on then they should get a new director and screenwriter for the sequels.

Right? I'd have been perfectly fine with them making it multiple movies if there was too much for a single movie, but if you need to cram things down, make any nods to the source material subtle, or write them out.

I don't think they needed to explain the three finger thing, and I bet people who read it got all giddy cause they understood it, but it was pretty easy to figure out that it was a sign of respect. If you're really desperate you can have some meta explanation in the form of gameshow commentators explaining what a retardedly named tracker jacker is to build context. If you're just bad you can just have some guy at a NASA control desk raise a wolf out of the ground and let it appear and ruin the whole premise of your competition.

[Tisket]

Apparently it's a trilogy.

[Jarvan]

Book to Movie translations now a days are just never enough.

The best way to do it is go the HBO mini series route. Also, just like Twilight, the books tend to be about 50% "Headspace" books, where you hear what she is thinking or feeling, get backstories from her memories.

These CAN be translated into movies, but they never come out quite right since it's very hard for your char to go around acting out thoughts like that.

This movie kept to the heart of the story in the book, with some small-large changes ( large being Peeta's Leg ). I have never actually seen a movie adaption of a book that I was like, that was PERFECT, it conveyed everything. Some are better then others, most are far far less then the book.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

I liked the movie but I didn't really expect it to be exactly like the book. nilandia pretty much covered the basic parts.

Re: names... Peeta is supposed to be a play off Pita bread- since he comes from a family of bakers. Katniss was named after a plant, the same way her sister Primrose is. A lot of the Districts seem to name their kids after whatever they see lots of in their districts. Hence some of the weird ass names (Glimmer, Marvel, etc) for the "luxury" districts and more.. hick sounding names for the ones that are the dirt poor districts(11, 12).

A few comments on the Capitol where I felt the movie fell quite a bit short:

In the books, the kids were basically emaciated/hollow looking. IMO there should have been a lot of CGI on a lot of the kids to make them look more like the concentration-campesque people they were described to be, Katniss included.

As was pointed out, the psychotic fashion was supposed to be meant to draw a juxtaposition of the wealth of the Capitol and the poverty of the districts. However, in the books, this is something Katniss notes only with some scorn but largely amusement. So the fact that they fixated on the fashion and not the food was a massive blunder in my opinion. As far as the food goes, there were 2 food related scenes in particular that were left out that I felt were really dumb to not include (from the books).

First scene is when Katniss and Peeta are first on the train, Effie tells them how glad she is they can use forks and knives and don't eat "like animals like the two we had last year".. mind you, two kids who are a) dead, and b) it was the first time in their life they'd actually been able to eat to satisfaction let alone being stuffed. Peeta and Katniss are so disgusted they both immediately stop eating with utensils and instead use their hands.

Second is when Katniss first meets Cinna, they're having lunch together and a ridiculous amount of food just appears on their table. Cinna sees Katniss staring at it as she's trying to figure out how long it would take her to assemble somewhat the same meal back in her home district (months) and he says to her, "How despicable we must seem to you."

I'm spoilering the next movie but people who hated this one probably won't see the next one so oh well, but in the next movie if they don't include the victory feast I will be very pissed. Basically Katniss and Peeta are at a feast at the Capitol to commemorate their victory with shit tons of food, Peeta says they can't eat anymore, so he's offered a small vial to "take care of it". They stop him from drinking it right there, though, because it actually just makes you throw up so you have more room to eat even more food. Again, this is with the understanding that people are regularly starving to death in the districts that keep the Capitol fueled.

So, I guess my main gripe is that I feel like they focused on totally the wrong thing to draw lines between the Capitol and the Districts and to show the sadism of the Capitol. Food was far and away the main thing that made Katniss and everyone else hate the Capitol, and their fashion was really just a weird as shit oddity that no one really cared about.

I'm somewhat bummed that avoxes weren't included (people found guilty of "treason" who have their voices removed and live out their lives as slaves, not even considered human) as another level of how shitty the Capitol is. I'm kind of curious how the hell they plan to make book 3 a viable movie considering a good third of it only happened because of an avox.

Speaking of book 3, I have very little faith they'll be able to do it any justice with just a PG-13 rating. The book is horrifically violent and gory and freaky, and crazy camera work isn't going to really cut it. We'll see, though, I guess.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

I got that the gamemakers were supposed to make the game actually take place (instead of everyone just hugging it out), but I got annoyed when they decided to start shooting fireballs at Kat, if they had got her with one it would have made for a terribly stupid "game" when one of the favorites just gets incinerated without actually participating. Felt very reverse deus ex machina (or non-reverse for the other competitors I guess).

Funny enough, in the book when Katniss is thinking about the games of previous years, she thinks of quite a few games where Gamemakers fuck up because of stuff like this. Like one where there was no water and the majority of tributes died quiet, bloodless deaths of exposure and dehydration, and not the bloody battles the audience loves. Also in the book, Katniss feels like the fireballs are her punishment for shooting the pig- they're going to light the "Girl on Fire", on fire, literally.

Of course, that translated.. not at all to the movie.

[Nilandia]

I pretty much have to agree on a lot of points you guys have raised. Adaptations of books will never completely capture the source. I'm not sure if I'd even want them to.

I did understand the context of the stuff from reading the book, but the movie really should stand on its own. The book's author also did the screenplay, so there may have been some things lost in translation where she's been so immersed in the material that she didn't realize some things just weren't clear enough.

And just because I can't let it go without more clarifying (call it a weakness!), the fireballs shot at Katniss were actually meant for the people watching the games. The gamemakers do that sort of thing when they think things aren't exciting enough, or when they want to get the tributes in the same area.

Gretchen

[Nilandia]

I'm kind of curious how the hell they plan to make book 3 a viable movie considering a good third of it only happened because of an avox.

Speaking of book 3, I have very little faith they'll be able to do it any justice with just a PG-13 rating. The book is horrifically violent and gory and freaky, and crazy camera work isn't going to really cut it. We'll see, though, I guess.
Good points all around. Just to point out, I've read that Woody Harrelson signed up for four movies, so I'd expect book 2 or 3 to be split into two parts.

I was expecting them to go into the Avoxes. When the hovercraft showed up at the beginning, I was thinking they were going to fit the red-headed girl in there somehow, but it wasn't meant to be I suppose.

I actually think they decided to go with the fashion rather than the food because it's easier to portray quickly and easily in visual format. Still, I'll admit I was waiting for them to show that Katniss only needed to say what she wanted and it would be brought to her within a minute or two. The showers would have been pretty derned cool, too.

Gretchen

[Celephais]

people found guilty of "treason" who have their voices removed and live out their lives as slaves, not even considered human.
They really should just take away their vision if that's what they want to accomplish.


Funny enough, in the book when Katniss is thinking about the games of previous years, she thinks of quite a few games where Gamemakers fuck up because of stuff like this. Like one where there was no water and the majority of tributes died quiet, bloodless deaths of exposure and dehydration, and not the bloody battles the audience loves.

They made a point in the movie of saying something like 20% of the tributes die of exposure or whatever it was, and suchandsuch die because of dehydration.

In the movie 0% died of anything other than getting the shit killed out of them violently. ... berries are angry and violent.

[Archigeek]

I saw it tonight, and wasn't very impressed. There could have been a lot more character development, but instead they chose to make fancy food that no one ate. Shallow characters, mediocre story, eh.

It just goes to show you how in the pocket the critics are these days. They totally panned the John Carter movie, which I liked, in spite of its sappiness. I thought it was much more original than Hunger Games. Of course, to be fair, I read THOSE books when I was a kid, so... maybe I'm biased.

[Warriorbird]

No hunger in the Hunger Games. In retrospect? Kinda a poor choice.

[Celephais]

No hunger in the Hunger Games. In retrospect? Kinda a poor choice.

Fashion games.

[Deathravin]

No hunger in the Hunger Games. In retrospect? Kinda a poor choice.

http://thehungergames.wikia.com/wiki/Tessera

It's called the hunger games because the kids between age 12 and 18 in each of the 12 districts get their names in the bucket to choose a tribute once for each year they've been eligible (12 year olds get one, 18 year olds 7 times).

Then they can choose to sign up for tessera once a month and get just enough food from the capital for their family to live for that month, and if they do sign up for it their name goes into the bucket one more time each reaping.

So if you're poor and can't get enough food turning 12 is a blessing and a curse. The more hungry you are, the more often you sign up for food the more times your name is in the bucket. This is how Gale's name is in the bucket 42 times for his age 17 reaping.

Katnis signs up for the tessera for her family as well but never allowed her sister to do the same.


In the book there was quite a bit of hunger in the games as well. Once Katnis found water (which took until she was almost dying of thirst) she sustained herself quite well in the games, especially after getting her bow. But the other tributes were always struggling to find enough to eat.

As for kids making stupid mistakes, nobody expects to win. And the game makers specifically screw with you, making it colder at night if you don't have a jacket or sleeping bag, etc. You might light a fire specifically to get killed so it's on your terms.

[Kitsun]

The hunger part is also why Katniss chose to blow up the career group's food stash. The district children were used to functioning while starving while the career districts were always well fed. They also obviously didn't focus on survival skills so she was going to let hunger wear them down.

[DCSL]

Spoilers ahead.

When I had my house-warming party, a bunch of people cornered me in my library to talk about all their favorite books. One chick would just NOT STOP pressuring me to read The Hunger Games. She was pretty persuasive. I read the trilogy in two days and.. meh. I found the majority of the characters unrealized or unsympathetic. ...I hate Katniss. I was grateful to the movie for being spared her self-absorbed, naive stream of consciousness.

I like Battle Royale (the book) much more. The kids are much more fully fleshed out, even the ones that die quickly. I cared for them in a way that I never did for the Hunger Games kids. And the main character actually has room in his head to consider the larger implications of things. Katniss is a damn puppet right up until the end.

What I did like about the books was the terrific portrayal of post-traumatic stress syndrome in the third book. Relatively realistic. I thought the author did a fantastic job with that. I gather that her father was in the military so possibly she had personal experience with it.

[Deathravin]

The Long Walk was always a favorite of mine. I remember reading it without knowing what it was about and being so shocked as I found out what they were doing.

[Tisket]

The Long Walk was always a favorite of mine. I remember reading it without knowing what it was about and being so shocked as I found out what they were doing.

I bought it on WB's recommendation but god knows when I'll get to it, I have something like 42 unread books on my Kindle at the moment.

[Warriorbird]

http://thehungergames.wikia.com/wiki/Tessera

It's called the hunger games because the kids between age 12 and 18 in each of the 12 districts get their names in the bucket to choose a tribute once for each year they've been eligible (12 year olds get one, 18 year olds 7 times).

Then they can choose to sign up for tessera once a month and get just enough food from the capital for their family to live for that month, and if they do sign up for it their name goes into the bucket one more time each reaping.

So if you're poor and can't get enough food turning 12 is a blessing and a curse. The more hungry you are, the more often you sign up for food the more times your name is in the bucket. This is how Gale's name is in the bucket 42 times for his age 17 reaping.

Katnis signs up for the tessera for her family as well but never allowed her sister to do the same.


In the book there was quite a bit of hunger in the games as well. Once Katnis found water (which took until she was almost dying of thirst) she sustained herself quite well in the games, especially after getting her bow. But the other tributes were always struggling to find enough to eat.

As for kids making stupid mistakes, nobody expects to win. And the game makers specifically screw with you, making it colder at night if you don't have a jacket or sleeping bag, etc. You might light a fire specifically to get killed so it's on your terms.

Of course. There's just no hunger in the movie. At all.

[Deathravin]

Of course. There's just no hunger in the movie. At all.

There should be in the 2nd one.

But anyway, I didn't think the movie was all that bad for what it was.

But I would have rather seen it made into a TV show with 3-4 seasons. Just include all the parts of the book and add things where you find necessary. There was plenty of story there. The movie, like most movies based on any book longer than a short story (Shawshank Redemption for example was 181 pages with 'Large Print' hard cover) is just going to leave too much out to tell a good story.

The movie didn't have any character development. There simply wasn't time. I didn't feel why were supposed to be so sad about Rue.

Where other books that have been made into television series such as Dexter and Game of Thrones have done extremely well. There's just such a difference between people who want to tell a good story and those who just want a pay day.

[Tenlaar]

But I would have rather seen it made into a TV show with 3-4 seasons. Just include all the parts of the book and add things where you find necessary. There was plenty of story there.

They never do that, look at Game of Thrones. 100+ pages worth of character development and plot elements in a one hour episode? Sure, we can totally do that!

[Deathravin]

Well, I tried the first episode of Game of Thrones and got a bit bored, so I stopped. But other books-turned-shows have done extremely well like Dexter (although dexter isn't quite true-to-book). And even Game of Thrones and True Blood have done very well - if not perfectly.

[Kitsun]

Well, I tried the first episode of Game of Thrones and got a bit bored, so I stopped. But other books-turned-shows have done extremely well like Dexter (although dexter isn't quite true-to-book). And even Game of Thrones and True Blood have done very well - if not perfectly.

How are you guaging success here?

If it is based on popularity, then Hunger Games is as successful as Game of Thrones. On adaptation without losing depth? Game of Thrones lost a ton of character development from book to screen.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

http://0.media.collegehumor.cvcdn.com/84/43/ae4811cc9d09c3a22d597a7818da721f.jpg

[Deathravin]

How are you guaging success here?

If it is based on popularity, then Hunger Games is as successful as Game of Thrones. On adaptation without losing depth? Game of Thrones lost a ton of character development from book to screen.

Personally I feel like I know Dexter and the characters around him very well, and the show seems to be a hit as a majority of the people around me enjoy it.

But as I said, I haven't watched passed the first episode of Game of Thrones, so that's probably not a great sign, but people also seem to like it. And as for losing character development, going from being actually moved by Rue and that whole situation in the book to seeing people confused why Katnis was even upset by Rue in the movie couldn't possibly be more developed than GoT.

[Tisket]

Personally I feel like I know Dexter and the characters around him very well, and the show seems to be a hit as a majority of the people around me enjoy it.

I actually enjoy the show more than I enjoyed the books. The series captured Dexter's internal "voice" well and the humor and tension are similar. However, the books lost me right around where the author was giving Dexter's Dark Passenger a supernatural source. Lame.

Oh, and making both his step children mini wannabe serial killers. Stupid.

I haven't watched the most recent season though so I don't know if it's following that storyline or not.

[Deathravin]

Dexter is getting on my nerves a bit. It was much better in its first few seasons. (The John Lithgow season was amazing, the two after were just ok).

Supposedly they deviated quite a bit from the books (I didn't read them), but they are keeping the general premise the same.

[TheEschaton]

Last season was okay, the whole "struggle with religion" was kind of ridiculous considering the character of Dexter, but the finale was a game changer for sure.