Wednesday, March 28, 2012

The Hunger Games Movie


I know it's really hard to find people sharing their thoughts on The Hunger Games movie so I figured I'd help you all out by sharing my thoughts!

I have to admit I've read a ton of reviews and feedback and this isn't really a review of the movie as a movie...it would be impossible for me to write such a thing, but rather a reflection on the way the two differ and adaptations in general.

First of all, I should say that I liked the movie. Some of the things I liked about it were the acting...the two characters I care about most, Katniss and Peeta, were great and honestly so was everyone else. I liked the way the Capitol looked and I liked the way District 12 looked--all of that worked for me. I cried during the Reaping and when Rue died and maybe during one of the scenes with Peeta and Katniss just because I love them so much. I had so many feelings watching this movie, because this is a story I love and have loved for a long time now and one that is near and dear to me as a shared reading experience and then suddenly it was becoming a shared experience in a new way via film. Yes I'm sentimental. As a story, I feel the film was a pretty faithful adaptation to the book, nothing truly significant was changed.

But thematically I think the film and the book diverge significantly and will continue to do so. I'm going to try to put my finger on why here and most of it has to do with two significant narrative choices they made...one was to make this story bigger than Katniss by removing her narration and limited perspective, and the other is the handling of the Peeta and Katniss relationship.

The book The Hunger Games is told from Katniss's first person present point of view. This makes it really intense and it also invites the reader in to deeply experience the things Katniss is experiencing. I remember having some frustration with Katniss in the first book, a feeling I think is shared by some other readers, because at this point in the story she exists in survival mode only. She knows only one world, the world of District 12 and she isn't thinking about the things both Gale and Peeta are thinking about, because she doesn't yet know herself. This is kind of illustrated in the film with her conversation with Gale at the beginning when he says he might want kids if he lived somewhere else and Katniss is like...but you live here. The possibility of anything else is completely foreign to her. Later when she talks to Peeta and he says if he's going to die he wants to still be him, she's like, "I can't afford to think that way." Katniss is living for survival only and hasn't yet grasped that there are other ways of living. She doesn't know herself, in the way Gale knows himself or Peeta does.

Even while the film technically hits these beats, they faced the obstacle of explaining the way the games work, something Katniss does for the reader as they happen in the books. So in order to accommodate that, they show the way the game makers strategize, they show Haymitch wheeling and dealing for sponsors, they created scenes between Seneca Crane and President Snow in which Snow explains why they have a winner, how hope is more powerful than fear. It was this scene actually, that makes me nervous for the adaptation of Mockingjay or...maybe not nervous, but feeling like the film will fail to carry the same weight the book did for me. I think the films are ultimately telling a story about the revolution of a society and not so much the story of one individual girl, how she got caught up as a piece in others games, and the heavy price she pays as an individual for the revolution. So many of the things Katniss does that were subversive in the book have no effect in the film...I mean I can't help but wonder if moviegoers who haven't read the book would understand just how much they mean. I guess Katniss's loving care of Rue's body after her death results in a rebellion in 11, but they cut the gift from District 11, which also sort of weakens the connection between who Katniss is and what she represents to the oppressed districts. And at the very end when Katniss has the brilliant idea to play the game and she and Peeta threaten to eat the poisonous berries, I don't know everything about those scenes felt rushed and as such it lacked impact. And not just dramatic impact, but narrative and thematic impact. In fact, by giving Seneca Crane story, it stole from what this scene meant for both Katniss and Peeta. We saw the immediate consequences for him, but it was hard to see just how much all of that meant in the scheme of things, and why this act of theirs was so rebellious.

By pulling out of Katniss's perspective, we're robbed of the trilogy's essential transformation themes which begin with the individual. And I think we're also going to pay more consequences for that later on since Mockingjay, in my opinion, is a brilliant tale of the cost of war and revolution for the individual. Is Katniss transformed? Yes, but she's haunted forever by what has happened.

It also changes the dynamic because in the book everything feels very immediate and horrific. But in the film, because you're seeing the bigger impact of it all, you have more of a sense that things are bigger and it's hard to really nail down what that will come to mean for Katniss who is primarily concerned with the people she loves before thinking on a bigger scale. It's hard to get how Katniss comes to see herself as a piece in the game because you're watching how she is one.

Speaking of things feeling horrific, they just...didn't? I know they cut the violence for the rating, but it was hard to really grasp that kids were killing kids. Also, the the film mostly ignored the poverty of the districts, there was no urgency for food which weakened the impact of just how bad life was in the districts and also weakened the Boy with the Bread story.


Anna Jarzab
wrote a great rundown of the changes in the Peeta and Katniss relationship from book to film. I think this is one of the things that makes me the saddest because it was one of the more interesting ideas in the book. It's not just that I loved Peeta, it was Katniss's struggle to know if he could be trusted and her doubts that his feelings were real. It was the creation of a love story that was for show to Katniss and for real to Peeta and what that continues to mean throughout the books. All of this is missing from the film, and it makes sense that it would be a struggle to show that conflict for Katniss, but Anna is right that they could have had that ending conversation where Katniss reveals she did it all for the games. But they didn't. And while I think they had Peeta say he didn't want to forget as foreshadowing for Mockingjay, their relationship is just sort of left there, I don't know, I think they only plan to have Katniss feel torn between Peeta and Gale and never show all of the conflict and complexities of her relationship with Peeta which might ultimately be confusing and is certainly less interesting. And since the real/not real element to Katniss and Peeta's relationship serves the overall theme of the books, it's completely left out of the movie.

Having said all of this, I did really like the movie. I thought there were some nice touches, I thought it had heart and was moving. I just think that the book is going to be the better story ultimately because it engages a variety of ideas in a more complex way. It's really made me think a lot about adaptations, though, like how you can have all the same elements of a plot but end up telling a different story. It made me think of how people always say The Hunger Games is a rip-off of Battle Royale because they share some plot points, when to me, they are completely different books.

Did you see it? Did you like it?

Amy

Comments (23)

Loading... Logging you in...
  • Logged in as
I loved the movie, but I totally get what you are saying. This is the million dollar issue when you have the translation of book to film...books can be effectively internal, but films are all visual. I didn't say this when I posted my thoughts, but I was spluttering and stuttering after the movie about how, in the book, Katniss was purely manipulating the Peeta relationship for survival purposes. In the movie, she just stands there holding his hand and grinning from ear to ear. Her fakery is there, but it is subtle, so if you have not read the book, you would have no idea. I don't think that takes away from the entertainment value of the film, but the nuances are missed. It will be interesting to see how the sequels play out...
1 reply · active 679 weeks ago
I agree it doesn't take away from the entertainment of the film, I just think they will end up being different...which is totally fine! It was a good film, I just think the film and the books will end up being different.
I really loved the film, and I must say, you're right regarding the thematic changes. A lot of that does come from being able to "hear" Katniss thinking in the book and having to pull it from her expressions in the film. But I was really ok with that.

As for the brutality, I really disagree. Though I think you're right that the killings could have been more visible (not so much for gore but to emphasize that these kids are killing each other), from the very first minutes of the film, the poverty hit me in a way that it didn't in the book. It was so bleak, and the juxtaposition between the poor walking into the reaping and the shiny uniforms of the Capitol guards and Effie was really shocking. I was nauseated for the entire film, and not because of the shaky camera.

Though I definitely missed District 11 sending Katniss the bread, I also thought showing the revolt hit home that Katniss is a tool, whether purposeful or not. She's just being herself, but it ignites a response in the Districts that I don't think anyone could necessarily foresee.

I am really loving all these HG posts. I wrote about it Sunday because I could not stop thinking about the film.
2 replies · active 679 weeks ago
Maybe you are a really visual person? I mean, I forgot to mention this in my post, but I'm fine with downplaying the poverty b/c I don't think the actors should have had to starve themselves, but even like on the train, Katniss's reaction to the food wasn't of someone who was really hungry.

The rebellion was fine with me, I just think I might have been confused on the why if I was just seeing the film.

Again, I liked the movie, I just think it's going to end up engaging different ideas than the books and there's nothing wrong with that, except that for me it loses some of the complexity of the books.
I know this sounds blasphemous, but would it be better for a person to see this movie who never read the books.
2 replies · active 679 weeks ago
Definitely go see the movie. I mean it's a good movie and the story shouldn't be missed. :)
I'm not sure when I will see the movie, but I promise you that I will see it though. Since I am not a big fan of going to the movie theater, too expensive, I will probably catch it on pay per view.
I can't decide what to do about this movie. I made my sister read the books, so she is just making her way through them right now. I was tired of her buying 2 dollar bargain books and then saying they were 'crap'. Uh, yeah, that can happen! So, anyway, since I haven't read the books since they came out I don't really remember everything. She raised the point about how Katniss does a lot of thinking and how would that play out in the movie. Good point! It was interesting to hear your thoughts.
1 reply · active 679 weeks ago
You might enjoy it more if you don't reread the book before the movie, tbh. I mean i'm sure you remember the basic plot and that's all there. :)

Anyway, I'll be interested to hear what you end up doing.
I wondered how they would deal with the 1st person narrative in the film and I liked the way it was handled. Stepping out of her head allowed for a new perspective and I appreciated it. But, I agree with you, I'm not sure how I feel about her internal struggle no longer being one of the focuses of the story. No matter how fantastic JLaw's performance was (in my opinion, very fantastic) I'm not sure her confusion and turmoil is so easy to grasp in the film. I guess I'm okay with it but it's fun to think how else it could have been handled, what decisions could have been made that would have kept that 'individual' aspect you speak of intact.
1 reply · active 679 weeks ago
Yeah they did do a really good job and it was an interesting choice. And I agree Jennifer Lawrence was GREAT. I just think I'm in mourning about the differences between books and movies ;)
You hit what I was feeling spot on. I just didn't get their relationship on screen at all. It didn't have the struggle that is portrayed in the books. It felt fake, and I didn't buy it at all. In fact, I wondered how anybody in the capital would buy into it either.

I also felt the games themselves lacked a little.
1 reply · active 679 weeks ago
Yeah it's sad bc it's one of the things I love best about the books.

Yeah the games lacked..urgency? I don't know exactly.
I promised Carl I'd wait and see the movie with him. I didn't love the book and am wondering what I'll think of the movie.
1 reply · active 679 weeks ago
You might end up liking it more than the book as that seems a popular opinion for people who didn't love the book. :)
I haven't seen the movie yet - taking the boys tomorrow - but the translation from first-person has been my biggest concern. On one hand, I think it will be cool to see a bigger picture of the Capitol, etc - but if it comes at the expense of understanding Katniss, that's not a good thing. I'm really excited to see it, though - and have a feeling I'll probably just gush like a fangirl unless I think it's really bad. :)
1 reply · active 679 weeks ago
Yeah I think you will like it. I mean my initial reaction to the film was that I really liked it, and this other stuff I just thought about later. and the acting is really great.
I haven't seen the movie yet, but it sounds like they took out the elements that made the book really subversive, which is hardly a surprise. Perhaps they could have used a more artistic director who would be interested in the question of "reality" when everything happens in front of a camera.

I just thank god it wasn't filmed for 3D. :P
1 reply · active 679 weeks ago
lol true about the 3d!

yeah I read a brilliant quote about how the movie couldn't really contain those elements because it can't condemn what it is.
Loved the books and loved the movie. I thought it was one of the better adaptations of a book, actually. Your concerns are spot on too. I had many of the same ones. I love Peeta in the books and I love the progression of his and Katniss' relationship through the books and that even while she was playing to the cameras she was confused about how she felt. You didn't get that in the film and I wonder how that will play out later: all those times on the train where he comforts her, for example, and yes, the boy with the bread. The real, not real scenes in Mockingjay. It will be an interesting ride, won't it?!
The whole way through the bit where Katniss suddenly becomes all 'dude I love you' I was waiting for her to end up saying it was all a survival ploy, even though I haven't read the books yet and I had suspicions something had been erased. Thanks for clarifying for us non-readers ;)

I'm interested in your ideas about the fact that the film is missing the impact of revolution on one person, mostly because the thing I liked the most about this film was that it went broader. I'm used to dystopian stories that never quite make that leap beyond individual consequences to wider societal ones, so I thought this film provided a nice change of theme. Looking forward to reading the book soon though and seeing the different version.
1 reply · active 677 weeks ago
You know the reason she went on to write the rest of the series was because she thought what Katniss did in the arena wouldn't be without consequences in the society she lived in...so it's not like societal revolution isn't a part of the story, it's just that what happens in Katniss seems less of the focus and understandbly so b/c of the difference in medium.
I really enjoyed the movie, but I do sympathize with what you;re saying about the depiction of poverty. It did bother me, that they had to make 'beautiful poor' instead of actual poor. Where were the signs of starvation? The ragged skin, the bad teeth, the sluggishness, the hungry look in the eyes? Poverty is an ugly thing, despite our Dickensian ideas about it being beautiful and ennobling, and I felt like this gussied it up toomuch. By the same rights, I really wanted the people in District 13 to, for example, have Appalachian accents. But, that's just it, in a movie, you are trying to make people identify with the characters, adn sadly, the average viewer is going to have more trouble identifying with someone they can so easily put in an 'other' category - they are a hillbilly, white trash, whatever, so they are CLEARLY not me… :/

Post a new comment

Comments by

Post a Comment

Thank you for taking the time to comment! I appreciate hearing your thoughts.