Fist pump

Ygritte on March 26, 2012 at 4:29 PM

~~~~~~~~~

Thanks and back atcha!!

ellifint on March 26, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Fist pump

I heard Sutherland say during a radio interview this morning that “this movie is for the 99%.” I switched to my iPod at that moment and ceased being interested in Hunger Games.

Nick_Angel on March 26, 2012 at 11:31 AM

Consider the source. Donald Sutherland is as far-left leaning as one can get. The fact that he plays the dictator of a totalitarian government was most likely lost on him.

As for Woody, I could care less about his politics – I just like him as an actor, particularly in “No Counry For Old Men” and “Zombieland”. And having read all three books (and I’m 50), I thought he did a decent job.

Weak, shallow writing. Period.

thomashton on March 26, 2012 at 11:59 AM

You haven’t read the Twilight books, have you? Now there’s some truly awful writing.

I heard Sutherland say during a radio interview this morning that “this movie is for the 99%.” I switched to my iPod at that moment and ceased being interested in Hunger Games.

Nick_Angel on March 26, 2012 at 11:31 AM

But, but…that doesn’t even make sense. Why would Sutherland make such a ridiculous comment? I thought this film had nothing to do with criticizing a capitalist society–it’s actually a libertarian story with a strong conservative message. Oh, I know what it must be: Sutherland doesn’t understand the true meaning of the film like everyone else blogging here. Boy, talk about stupid!

Burke on March 26, 2012 at 12:39 PM

It’s entirely possible that Sutherland doesn’t understand it at all. I just knew that I wanted none of what he was selling.

Bonnie, Bulletchaser, Mathscience41 and Williamg all seemed to sum up my thinking on the Hunger Games. They may not be “great literature” but I see them as a little bit of …take your pick… a ‘gateway drug’ to the addiction of a libertarain leaning inherent distruct of big/powerful government or perhaps a little bit of a vaccine against the lefty indoctrination that they live in school.

That lefties like Southerland or Harrelson are in it, and are unable to see it other than through the lenses of their own horrible leftie delusions does not make it bad (pity they’re so deluded as to be unable to see what’s actually there).

Read them (understanding the intended teen audience) and see the film. It ain’t Shakespeare or Academy Award level stuff, but in the sea of leftie leaning hogwash out there, this one can at least be enjoyed

I heard Sutherland say during a radio interview this morning that “this movie is for the 99%.” I switched to my iPod at that moment and ceased being interested in Hunger Games.

Nick_Angel on March 26, 2012 at 11:31 AM

But, but…that doesn’t even make sense. Why would Sutherland make such a ridiculous comment? I thought this film had nothing to do with criticizing a capitalist society–it’s actually a libertarian story with a strong conservative message. Oh, I know what it must be: Sutherland doesn’t understand the true meaning of the film like everyone else blogging here. Boy, talk about stupid!

Everyone I talk to just LOVES the Hunger Games. I read all three books and found them to be lazy, shallow writing. It totally reminded me of George Lucas and Star Wars. Return of the Jedi came around and he couldn’t figure out what was worse than a Death Star so he worked in another one. Collins does the same with Book 2–”hey, let’s just put them in another Hunger Games!”

If she was looking for a series full of deep meaning and commentary she failed miserably. I can give some leeway in that this is “teen fiction” for the lack of depth here, but no one really gets her commentary unless she tells you what she was doing and then massages the trilogy’s narrative fit it. Frankly, I don’t buy it and the fact that she is raking in millions off of some altruistic, social justice trilogy just smacks of hypocricy.

Weak, shallow writing. Period.

I saw the movie with my wife, who read the books (I didn’t). She was pretty critical, I a little less so. It was just OK.
Did they ever mention why it’s only kids that got chosen for the games? Why no adults?

Also, the crazy handi-cam blurred shots are the bane of my movie going existence. It’s like the lazy man’s way to show “action.” It makes 75% of the audience sick and the “action” isn’t gripping anyway becasue you don’t know what the heck is going on. Like the climactic fight at the cornucopia, who can tell who is beating who up?! Everything is just one big blur until they pull back a little. Again, I think it’s just pure lazy film-making covered by the excuse of being “edgy”.

Free Indeed on March 26, 2012 at 10:55 AM

They choose the kids between 12-18 because they can. It’s a show of power and that the districts are helpless compared to the might of the capital. It’s explained briefly that the ‘reason’ is cause the districts revolted once and when they were put down this tribute is a reminder of the shame of their revolt. But the president briefly says that it is cause they can.

Also, the crazy handi-cam blurred shots are the bane of my movie going existence. It’s like the lazy man’s way to show “action.” It makes 75% of the audience sick and the “action” isn’t gripping anyway becasue you don’t know what the heck is going on. Like the climactic fight at the cornucopia, who can tell who is beating who up?! Everything is just one big blur until they pull back a little. Again, I think it’s just pure lazy film-making covered by the excuse of being “edgy”.

I like sci-fi, adventure stories, I read and enjoyed the Harry Potter books, and so on, but reading/watching stories about teens on the hunt against other teens in a televised reality show doesn’t spark any interest in me. Also sounds like an odd concept.

TigerPaw on March 26, 2012 at 12:05 AM

It’s one of those stories that likes to have its cake and eat it, too. Superficially, it’s all about satirizing reality TV and savaging a government that would be heartless and fascist enough to stage such brutal “games.” Actually, though, the film runs like one long episode of “Survivor” and it attempts to be engrossing on this level in every way possible. I’m sure 90% of the audience are enthralled by the contest and rooting for Katniss to get the others before they get her, and the movie producers understand this perfectly. It’s like films where the outward message is to deplore violence but where violence is included in horrific amounts.

I like sci-fi, adventure stories, I read and enjoyed the Harry Potter books, and so on, but reading/watching stories about teens on the hunt against other teens in a televised reality show doesn’t spark any interest in me. Also sounds like an odd concept.

Actually, that is really not what the movies is about . . . it is tangential to the story. If you get hung up on that, then you will miss what the story really is about. I guess you have to read the books (which I am glad I did). I dislike sci-fi movies a lot. However, these are not sci-fi books. It is more like the Roman Games meets post-apocalypse. The deeper you read into the books the more you understand that this could really happen.

What is clear to everyone that I know who read the books . . . it is what the world could be without God. It is also about a deceitful government run amok.

However, if you are more into “Running Man” which I did not watch, you might not enjoy “Hunger Games”.

Voter from WA State on March 25, 2012 at 10:22 AM

I don’t mean to insult anyone who likes the books or the movies, but based on what I’ve read (and I’ve read several reviews, summaries, etc. of the books and films the last few days, and most of the posts on this thread), the stories sound dull to me.

I like sci-fi, adventure stories, I read and enjoyed the Harry Potter books, and so on, but reading/watching stories about teens on the hunt against other teens in a televised reality show doesn’t spark any interest in me. Also sounds like an odd concept.

It kind of worked with the 80s Running Man movie, though, with Schwarzengger. But then, that was a 30- 40- whatever year old tough guy. I don’t know if I’d buy a 15 year old girl with a bow, and I’m not against strong female characters.

If this ever comes on cable television, I might watch it once to see what it’s like.

Not at all like the two reviews I’ve heard from people I know who have seen the film. Both, who attended with groups of 6 or more, (a 60 year old woman and a 25 year old man), liked the movie. Of course, they did have the advantage of having read the book. It’s an easy read.

bertielou on March 25, 2012 at 4:39 PM

It is an easy read. I read about half of the first book at Target while waiting for a prescription yesterday. I’m going to skip the movie. There’s enough horrible stuff in the real world – I don’t need to see a bunch of kids hacking at each other for my entertainment. I’m getting old and uncool.

Donald Sutherland and Woody Harrelson…ehhh I’ll keep my $$$ in my pocket.

NY Conservative on March 24, 2012 at 10:07 AM

Yep. I’ve had it with hollywood uberpolitical asswipes who insult me and then expect me to spend money on their movies. I’ve eliminated about 90% of my former moviegoing activities as a result, but I really don’t miss it one bit.

Watch this video interview of Suzanne Collins about the writing of these books. It explains a lot.

jldhx on March 25, 2012 at 5:41 PM

Thanks. That was interesting.

A small point, it’s Howard Fast, not Arthur Koestler, who wrote Spartacus. Arthur Koestler wrote Darkness at Noon, which you mentioned.

Gladtobehere on March 25, 2012 at 6:54 PM

Thanks, Gladtobehere. I mixed up the title, but not the book or author. Koestler wrote “The Gladiators” (1939) which was all about the Spartacus revolt, and the subtext of that book was a communist one. That’s the book I was thinking of. Of course, as you point out, Koestler also wrote “Darkness at Noon” (a year later).

However, I noticed something quickly which prompted a discussion with my daughter that night. Panem, this crumbled America, is missing two very important things: God and the Constitution. This prompted a discussion with my daughter where I told her bluntly: This country is less than a hundred years from being Panem because God is considered the enemy and the Constitution is considered a list of suggestions.

Leftists who want to cling to this story as affirmation that capitalism and those mean, homophobe, racist conservatives caused the conditions of the 12 districts may need to evaluate things a little closer. Any right leaning government is going to be pro-God and keep the Constitution as the law of the land.