The Hunger Games (2012) - Review Thread

I revisited this a few months ago for my film class and it did rise slightly in my estimation.

From letterboxd: I gave this a pretty lukewarm review back in 2012, but I've definitely warmed to it since then. Many have pointed out that the basic premise isn't wildly original, and I agree, but this film is probably the best example of how to do it well. I also think the world created is an interesting one as are the dynamics of it. Jennifer Lawrence gives a very strong performance and the actual character of Katniss is better than I remember too. Josh Hutcherson I'm a bit more mixed on. I like his work in the first half, but once the games start he becomes less interesting. I like the tone director Gary Ross sets and the early scenes, particularly the ones in District 12, really show this off. There's also some interesting stuff going on thematically such as the exploitation of the lower class by the wealthy and the media's obsession with violence.

However, I still have problems. The production value is pretty weak, which leads to a lot of lackluster effects. Worse though is how it generally makes the world feel small. The premise of this film's world is very interesting to me, but I don't think it ever delivers on the promise. There is a clear disconnect between the interiors and exteriors in the film. I also really don't like the garish costumes. I get it, it represents decadence, but it comes off as trying too hard and feels tonally off the rest of film. Beyond that, I think the climax to the film is really lame and while the action scenes aren't as bad as I remembered, they certainly aren't great.

I think The Hunger Games' biggest weakness is just that it isn't a very memorable or special. It has a lot of interesting ideas, but they never fully deliver, and while there are some good scenes, there aren't any great ones. I respect that the film is dealing with larger ideas, but it never satisfies my appetite.

B

why not?

Here's why:

"On buses, in stores, and in libraries, you’ve seen them being read. The Hunger Games is becoming something of a phenomenon. Like Twilight, it is manufactured primarily for young adults (or YA) and does its best to deal with ‘serious’ subjects. But this is precisely where I find both of them to be disturbing and completely unnecessary. The Hunger Games, for those uninitiated, is about a post-apocalyptic future where adolescents and teenagers are pitted against each other for a battle to the death. Indeed, Battle Royale did it before, but there’s a big different between what the latter did and what The Hunger Games is doing right now. In the case of The Hunger Games, we have an author and filmmaker who are seeking to sell this pasteurized, ironed out science-fiction world, where the real nature of what’s actually happening has been cleaned up and removed so it can be sold easily and digested by young adults and 20-somethings alike.


Katniss Everdeen, played by Jennifer Lawrence (blander than she’s ever been before), lives in complete poverty in a district ominously named District-12. She resides in a future-world named Panem, what was once North America. She does her best to take care of her mother and younger sister with the use of her terrific hunting and marksmanship with a bow—and like in all futuristic societies, there’s an overbearing, almost totalitarian regime that does their best to keep all of the districts in line and impoverished. The Capitol-- the hub of the rich and well-off-- host an event called The Hunger Games. It’s an annual event that brings together all of the districts, as two contestants are selected from each one. Katniss’ younger sister is chosen, but in order to save her from the games, Katniss nominates herself instead.


Director Gary Ross gives the film a gritty, handheld aesthetic that works for the most part, considering the rugged, earthy tones while in District-12. And the world is indeed very believable, especially the districts. But the problems are the cast of characters we have here. Katniss, indeed, is a strong female protagonist. However, she proves herself to be completely without personality, right alongside everyone else. A majority of the contestants in The Hunger Games event prove themselves to be faceless, nameless people merely set in place for the kill. One of the best examples is the band of one- dimensional, ‘evil’ teenagers. Cato (Alexander Ludwig) is the alpha-male leader by default. They are never given much sympathy. In fact, they are almost completely deranged. And yes, there are several others characters whose names they share with people of the Ancient Roman Empire—as if the symbolism wasn’t heavy-handed enough.


It doesn’t get much better. Katniss slowly falls for her fellow District-12 member, Peeta (Josh Hutcherson), who loves her dearly. This is where it starts to show its teeny-bopper roots. Unbelievable and underdeveloped, the romance works as only a gimmicky way for us to show some sympathy towards the two. It could have benefited from some extra breathing room for the characters to bond. There’s barely any time for that. The Hunger Games does flow well, though. It moves at a brisk pace despite the long running time (142 minutes). It does commit a few faults, which include numerous deus ex machina. Katniss, of course, is miraculously saved time and time again by the author/screenwriter rather than her own skills and abilities.

Okay, well, I’ll admit, I’m being very harsh towards it. It’s not a bad film—it’s well-made and the sense of foreboding and suspense are certainly there. It also shows some signs of intelligence. Katniss illustrates her warm-hearted nature by refusing to kill, and when she finally does, she expresses her anguish by attempting to wash the blood from her hands. Does this make up for the rest of the bloodshed? What about all of the other teenagers who were needlessly killed, manipulated and discarded for no reason? Katniss expresses her sadness when a loving, sweet character dies—but what about everyone else? Gary Ross and Suzanne Collins, as good as their intentions may be, created a film that exploits and relishes in the fight to the death of innocent kids. And I realized, as I looked around the theater and as the ‘games began’, that people were— ironically enough—excited about seeing the bloodshed. This can’t have been what they wanted, right?"

Well, you obviously haven't.

I still like both Hunger Gameses.

And I still sort of think the first one is alright

And I still hate Kick-Ass.

I put my little Catching Fire review on Letterboxd. It was harmless, nothing great and had some timing issues. Not a bad way to spend an afternoon.