The Hunger Games

  • Thread starter Thread starter empther
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I just saw this movie at the dollar show. I enjoyed it very much. The only thing I really didn’t like was the fight scenes. The shaky cam was so horrid during them it was very had to tell what was going on. I am truly tired of seeing that stupid shaky cam trend.

I will definitely go see the sequel though.
 
Okay, I’m new and very late to the discussion but if anyone is out there, here goes… my daughter and I had this discussion and we both agree…

Katniss and Gale… or Peeta… and why?

I know in the book she made it Peeta but I just don’t buy it. I actually am mad at her (the author) over it…
 
Okay, I’m new and very late to the discussion but if anyone is out there, here goes… my daughter and I had this discussion and we both agree…

Katniss and Gale… or Peeta… and why?

I know in the book she made it Peeta but I just don’t buy it. I actually am mad at her (the author) over it…
How far are you along the series? The answer is potentially spoilerrific.
 
Okay, I’m new and very late to the discussion but if anyone is out there, here goes… my daughter and I had this discussion and we both agree…

Katniss and Gale… or Peeta… and why?

I know in the book she made it Peeta but I just don’t buy it. I actually am mad at her (the author) over it…
How far are you along the series? The answer is potentially spoilerrific.
 
Although Katniss and Gale are naturals for each other, in the end Gale does something Katniss can’t forgive.

Frankly I thought Katniss was being unreasonable,
it was not Gale who did the big naughty,

however, maybe the author intended to say sharing intense experiences sets up love affairs and Katniss and Peeta went to the Games together.
 
Although Katniss and Gale are naturals for each other, in the end Gale does something Katniss can’t forgive.

Frankly I thought Katniss was being unreasonable,
it was not Gale who did the big naughty,

however, maybe the author intended to say sharing intense experiences sets up love affairs and Katniss and Peeta went to the Games together.
Also, Katniss wasn’t deliberately punishing Gale. She knew it wasn’t truly his fault. It’s just that she couldn’t look at him without thinking of the bomb he’d invented that had done… you know what.

She just couldn’t be with him any more, on that instinctive, emotional level. Sure, it’s not fair, but it’s also not Katniss actively doing something unfair. Her response to what happened is no more her fault than what happened was Gale’s fault.
 
Okay but they are characters in a book. I’m disappointed in the author for writing it that way. She chose to have Katniss choose an effeminite shy creepy stalker type (I’m a little harsh but Peeta did lurk around and spy on Katniss when they were kids). Meanwhile her and Gale were the real deal, first, he was first, (not in the Biblical sense) which in a book (and to young girls) should mean something re “true love” and second he was in a natural setting, good looking, masculine, supportve, defender of life, freedom and liberty. But the author connived and concocted the story in such a way as to make it Peeta. We are being degendered. Katniss is the strong leader and Peeta is the sensitive lover. Give me a break. Otherwise, I thought the series was good. But it seemed to carry with it a sense of hopelessness. If you’re right you’re wrong and if you’re wrong you’re wrong…
 
I’m disappointed in the author for writing it that way. She chose to have Katniss choose an effeminite shy creepy stalker type (I’m a little harsh but Peeta did lurk around and spy on Katniss when they were kids).
Perhaps you should read the entire series more carefully. If you had already, you clearly would not find it acceptable to simplify the characters to that level.

I still fail to see in what way Peeta is “effeminate,” or why that would even matter.
Meanwhile her and Gale were the real deal, first, he was first,
He was not first. Katniss liked him as a friend.
which in a book (and to young girls) should mean something re “true love”
Why on Earth should it mean that? I do not understand this at all. And young children should not be reading books like the Hunger Games; it is clearly thematically for an older audience (I would imagine pre-teen at the earliest, in general).
and second he was in a natural setting, good looking, masculine, supportve, defender of life, freedom and liberty.
So? Women are not obligated to fall in love with people who meet all of those characteristics (“good-looking?” Really?), nor are women required to fall in love with the first person who does fit all of those.
But the author connived and concocted the story in such a way as to make it Peeta.
It is her story. She can do whatever she wants. Any author “connives and concocts the story” by your definition. It is not as if she is altering some natural event. The entire book is a construct.
We are being degendered. Katniss is the strong leader and Peeta is the sensitive lover. Give me a break.
God forbid! We must alert the Church elders!

Would you mind pointing out in Catholic teaching where masculinity is defined as ‘not-sensitive,’ and where women are called to be ‘weak followers?’
 
I just saw this movie at the dollar show. I enjoyed it very much. The only thing I really didn’t like was the fight scenes.
Then you won’t want to see the sequels. It gets much worse.
I will definitely go see the sequel though.
There will be three sequels.

The third book in particular has a lot of scenes. A lot! It could not all be put into a single movie. You can make a scene change in a book with a few words, but in a movie you must spend some time showing the action.

The producers plan to divide up the rest of the story into three parts. Exactly how they intend to do this is still a secret, of course.

Can we say “all day Thanksgiving day Hunger Games Marathon ala the Godfather” ? :eek:
 
Okay but they are characters in a book. I’m disappointed in the author for writing it that way. She chose to have Katniss choose an effeminite shy creepy stalker type (I’m a little harsh but Peeta did lurk around and spy on Katniss when they were kids). Meanwhile her and Gale were the real deal, first, he was first, (not in the Biblical sense) which in a book (and to young girls) should mean something re “true love” and second he was in a natural setting, good looking, masculine, supportve, defender of life, freedom and liberty. But the author connived and concocted the story in such a way as to make it Peeta. We are being degendered. Katniss is the strong leader and Peeta is the sensitive lover. Give me a break. Otherwise, I thought the series was good. But it seemed to carry with it a sense of hopelessness. If you’re right you’re wrong and if you’re wrong you’re wrong…
SPOILERS*************

Opposites attract. It says it all at the end. She needed the peace Peeta gave her. She had enough fire already and didn’t need Gale’s. But as any girl is she’s was attracted to the masculine types over the more sensitive types. That’s more instinct and genes than love. Peeta does get a little needy at times but it compliments her take care of every personality and he has enough strength to take care of her when she needs it just not in the overt ways Gale might has proceeded. As shown at the end when he plants the primroses around her house and quietly shows up to take care of her at the end.

I like the movie and thought it was the best movie of the year so far. It probably won’t win or get nominated for any Oscars as the people who nominate and vote in the Academy are so out of touch with reality that they will only consider trashy, morally offensive material these days. I still think it’s the best all around movie of the year.
 
SPOILERS*************

Opposites attract. It says it all at the end. She needed the peace Peeta gave her. She had enough fire already and didn’t need Gale’s. But as any girl is she’s was attracted to the masculine types over the more sensitive types. That’s more instinct and genes than love. Peeta does get a little needy at times but it compliments her take care of every personality and he has enough strength to take care of her when she needs it just not in the overt ways Gale might has proceeded. As shown at the end when he plants the primroses around her house and quietly shows up to take care of her at the end.

I like the movie and thought it was the best movie of the year so far. It probably won’t win or get nominated for any Oscars as the people who nominate and vote in the Academy are so out of touch with reality that they will only consider trashy, morally offensive material these days. I still think it’s the best all around movie of the year.
The King’s Speech and The Artist are hardly trashy or morally offensive.🙂
 
I like the movie and thought it was the best movie of the year so far. It probably won’t win or get nominated for any Oscars as the people who nominate and vote in the Academy are so out of touch with reality that they will only consider trashy, morally offensive material these days. I still think it’s the best all around movie of the year.
The King’s Speech and The Artist are hardly trashy or morally offensive.🙂

Two days ago, TCM channel showed Jimmy Cagney’s White Heat . “I made it, ma. I’m on top of the world.”

Jimmy Cagney was snubbed for an Oscar nomination that year although 1949 wasn’t exactly a vintage year for great movies. ( Were there any?
Picture:
"ALL THE KING’S MEN", “Battleground”, “The Heiress”, “A Letter to Three Wives”, “Twelve O’Clock High”
Actor:
BRODERICK CRAWFORD in "All the King’s Men", Kirk Douglas in “Champion”, Gregory Peck in “Twelve O’Clock High”, Richard Todd in “The Hasty Heart”, John Wayne in “Sands of Iwo Jima”
) 🤷 ( Broderick Crawford won? :bigyikes: )

Cagney played a psychotic killer with nothing lovable about him. People don’t give awards to characters like that no matter how good a job the actor did.

If you read all three books you know the whole story is about war and killing. There isn’t much to like. Katniss herself seems to kill without worrying about it much. How about that woman who Katniss killed upon entering her house?

I don’t expect ten Oscar nominations for this movie. Members of the Academy already know about the last two books.
 
Two days ago, TCM channel showed Jimmy Cagney’s White Heat . “I made it, ma. I’m on top of the world.”

Jimmy Cagney was snubbed for an Oscar nomination that year although 1949 wasn’t exactly a vintage year for great movies. ( Were there any?
Picture:
"ALL THE KING’S MEN", “Battleground”, “The Heiress”, “A Letter to Three Wives”, “Twelve O’Clock High”
Actor:
BRODERICK CRAWFORD in "All the King’s Men", Kirk Douglas in “Champion”, Gregory Peck in “Twelve O’Clock High”, Richard Todd in “The Hasty Heart”, John Wayne in “Sands of Iwo Jima”
) 🤷 ( Broderick Crawford won? :bigyikes: )

Cagney played a psychotic killer with nothing lovable about him. People don’t give awards to characters like that no matter how good a job the actor did.

If you read all three books you know the whole story is about war and killing. There isn’t much to like. Katniss herself seems to kill without worrying about it much. How about that woman who Katniss killed upon entering her house?

I don’t expect ten Oscar nominations for this movie. Members of the Academy already know about the last two books.
I found it interesting that Cagney, who had something of a career playing tough guys won his Oscar for Yankee Doodle Dandy.

Awards are given to those types of characters – Anthony Hopkins in Silence of the Lambs, and Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight come to mind.

I don’t think the Academy will be swayed by the other books in the series.
 
I found it interesting that Cagney, who had something of a career playing tough guys won his Oscar for Yankee Doodle Dandy.
Cagney actually started out as a song and dance man. :eek: But his talent for playing bad guys was soon recognized ( in Sinner’s Holiday, 1930 ).
Awards are given to those types of characters – Anthony Hopkins in Silence of the Lambs, and Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight come to mind.
Hannibal Lector had some geniune feelings for Agent Clarice Starling. “The world is more interesting with you in it.” This gave him some sympathy with the audience despite his evil ways. People felt sorry for the wretch.
I don’t think the Academy will be swayed by the other books in the series.
When a movie rakes in 700 million dollars at the boxoffice in a few mounts, count on it, everybody in Hollywood scrambles to find out why. They’ve all read the books.
They found out that Katniss is not the most sympathetic character. She kills with little worrying over it. Except for her devotion to Prim, she shows little if any affinity for anybody in all three books. Gale is a friend at the beginning of the first book but it doesn’t get very far.
Katniss would never be named Miss Congeniality.
Best actress will probably go to Meryl Streep for her latest with Tommy Lee Jones. It’s a “safe choice”. Hollywood plays it safe.
Besides, Hunger Games is one of those unique stories that couldn’t be imitated without being an obvious rip off ot the original. No more movies like it could be made ( by somebody else ). So why encourage it?
 
Perhaps you should read the entire series more carefully. If you had already, you clearly would not find it acceptable to simplify the characters to that level.

I still fail to see in what way Peeta is “effeminate,” or why that would even matter.

He was not first. Katniss liked him as a friend.

Why on Earth should it mean that? I do not understand this at all. And young children should not be reading books like the Hunger Games; it is clearly thematically for an older audience (I would imagine pre-teen at the earliest, in general).

So? Women are not obligated to fall in love with people who meet all of those characteristics (“good-looking?” Really?), nor are women required to fall in love with the first person who does fit all of those.

It is her story. She can do whatever she wants. Any author “connives and concocts the story” by your definition. It is not as if she is altering some natural event. The entire book is a construct.

God forbid! We must alert the Church elders!

Would you mind pointing out in Catholic teaching where masculinity is defined as ‘not-sensitive,’ and where women are called to be ‘weak followers?’
Okay I admitted I was a little harsh on Peeta, it’s a book/movie, I took sides. Anyway the point abount the young girls is this series was overwhelmingly successful with young girls. And as Gale was the first potential male character introduced it would seem plausible that a certain amount of the young girls reading the book would have “fallen” for him, you know what I mean, they would have hoped he and Katniss would have become the primary love interests in the story.

The way this plays out it deviates from the Disney type, Knight in Shining Armor Prince Charming or Wesley from Princess Bride (As you wish…) scenario and goes in a direction I didn’t like (nor did my daughter). Again, the author has the right, it’s her book. But just like movies I have the right to question her choices and consider my own. If I was an English teacher in high school or college, it might be a good exercise to take books one and two and have the students write book three. To see where they would take it. It’s just science fiction. Just the fact that I’m posting on it several months after reading the books and seeing the movie indicates it made me think. That’s my favorite measure of how to rate books and movies is whether or not they make me think. I’ve seen a lot of totally forgettable movies that were entertaining at the time but the next day I couldn’t remember a thing.
 
And as Gale was the first potential male character introduced it would seem plausible that a certain amount of the young girls reading the book would have “fallen” for him, you know what I mean, they would have hoped he and Katniss would have become the primary love interests in the story.
So? Who cares what the readers think? The idea that an author should be held hostage to the whims of her readers makes no sense. The author should produce the product that he desires.
The way this plays out it deviates from the Disney type, Knight in Shining Armor Prince Charming or Wesley from Princess Bride (As you wish…) scenario and goes in a direction I didn’t like (nor did my daughter).
:eek: SUZANNE COLLINS DELENDA EST!
 
Okay I admitted I was a little harsh on Peeta, it’s a book/movie, I took sides. Anyway the point abount the young girls is this series was overwhelmingly successful with young girls. And as Gale was the first potential male character introduced it would seem plausible that a certain amount of the young girls reading the book would have “fallen” for him, you know what I mean, they would have hoped he and Katniss would have become the primary love interests in the story.
While I do know at least one female reader who felt the way you describe, most don’t for a simple reason you’re overlooking: Collins spends very little time fleshing out Gale’s character. He’s barely featured in The Hunger Games and only slightly more so in Catching Fire. He doesn’t really get a lot of focus until Mockingjay.

As it is, his character is portrayed in a pretty boring, one-dimensional way for two-thirds of the series. You can hardly blame readers for generally finding the relationship between Katniss and Peeta more riveting than that between Katniss and Gale.
 
Cagney actually started out as a song and dance man. :eek: But his talent for playing bad guys was soon recognized ( in Sinner’s Holiday, 1930 ).

Hannibal Lector had some geniune feelings for Agent Clarice Starling. “The world is more interesting with you in it.” This gave him some sympathy with the audience despite his evil ways. People felt sorry for the wretch.

When a movie rakes in 700 million dollars at the boxoffice in a few mounts, count on it, everybody in Hollywood scrambles to find out why. They’ve all read the books.
They found out that Katniss is not the most sympathetic character. She kills with little worrying over it. Except for her devotion to Prim, she shows little if any affinity for anybody in all three books. Gale is a friend at the beginning of the first book but it doesn’t get very far.
Katniss would never be named Miss Congeniality.
Best actress will probably go to Meryl Streep for her latest with Tommy Lee Jones. It’s a “safe choice”. Hollywood plays it safe.
Besides, Hunger Games is one of those unique stories that couldn’t be imitated without being an obvious rip off ot the original. No more movies like it could be made ( by somebody else ). So why encourage it?
I agree Hollywood will take note of the sucess of the films and possibly try to duplicate it. My point was that when it comes time for next years Oscar nominations the film will be judged on it’s own merits, not the remaining books in the series – which will have their own films.

Katniss does show affinity for other people. Go back to the first book and look at her relationship with Rue.

Meryl Streep will probably passed over for her current film after her undeserved win this year for Iron Lady.
 
Katniss does show affinity for other people. Go back to the first book and look at her relationship with Rue.
Oops!
All right. Besides Prim, Katniss seems to have some affinity for Rue, about which she knows very little.

What about guys? Does she fall madly in love with guys? Hardly. Gale helped her hunt in the woods and that’s the extent of that relationship. Peeta is no Clark Gable and Katniss never gets that excited about him.

I can see Shakespeare doing a rewrite of Hunger Games in terms of the romantic aspects: “Much Ado About Nothing”.

Meryl Streep will probably passed over for her current film after her undeserved win this year for Iron Lady.
You could be right. But don’t be surprised if she wins again.
Her latest movie with Tommy Lee Jones has a theme relevant to everybody over forty. Does Hollywood reward movies like that? Definitely!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top