In-Depth Review: The Hunger Games Movie as an Adaptation

In broad strokes, The Hunger Games movie follows the plot of the books closely. However, ultimately, it failed to deliver the powerful, emotional impact that comes with the book. If you have read the books, here are several (mostly nitpicky) reasons that the movie failed to live up to the book. If you haven't read the book, read further at your own risk--spoilers abound.

Stylists & Portrayal of the Capitol

In the book, Katniss gradually bonds with all of her stylists (not just Cinna) enough so that by book three, she’s more understanding towards them and passionately defends them when she finds them imprisoned. So it was a little bit disappointing to see that not even a kind word from them was offered in her direction (other than Cinna). Showing the human side of the Capitol is just as important as showing how incredibly self-involved and non-empathetic they are towards citizens from other districts. It's important that, by the end of the book, it's clear that there are enemies and friends on both sides.

Riots in District 11

This scene just should not have happened in this movie at all. It was too soon. In the book, District 11, the district that Rue and Thresh are from, sends Katniss bread in recognition for what she did for Rue. Instead, the movie cut to riots in District 11, which if I remember correctly, do not happen until Catching Fire.

The bread from District 11 would have been much better as it helps to set up the reason for the riot later in the series. The fact that one district is trying to help another district’s tribute is HUGE and important to the storyline. I don’t know why this was cut.

The Rule Change Scene

In the books, when Katniss realizes that both she and Peeta can win, she shouts Peeta’s name instantly. She doesn’t even realize what she’s doing, her first thought is just: find Peeta immediately. And then her next thought is “Oops!”, and she covers her mouth and realizes what a horrible mistake she’s made—and then she’s lucky enough that it doesn’t cost her anything.  Then, after all that plays out in her mind, she thinks out how finding Peeta is strategical. Maybe it’s a stretch, but I felt like in that scene, we get a glimpse of Katniss’ … maybe not “love,” yet, but her care for Peeta.

It doesn’t happen quite like that in the movie. It’s probably nitpicky on my part, but I really loved how in that scene, Katniss kind of loses control and exposes feelings she doesn’t even realize she has yet.

Katniss &Peeta/Ending

For the most part, I thought the Katniss and Peeta scenes were good and generally stayed true to the book.

However.

The book was vague about Katniss’ true motives because Katniss really doesn’t know how she feels about Peeta. She doesn’t want to get married or have kids--romance is just not a top priority to her. And yet she feels a certain safety with Peeta; she dreads having to let go of his hand. That’s how the first book ends. She breaks his heart, because she’s confused, but then she doesn’t want to let go.

The movie is completely different. It’s lame. It’s not tense enough. Katniss needs to break Peeta’s heart. It needs to be clear that he is heartbroken because, as if there’s any doubt to be had in the first place, it reveals that Peeta was never acting, he really loves her, and he wants more. Meanwhile, the book ending reveals Katniss’ own confusion, how she thinks she doesn’t want to be with Peeta that way, but then there are little things that hint that she might (like how she already misses him and doesn’t want to let go of his hand).

In the movie, when Peeta asks what they do now, she says, “We try to forget.” But it’s not clear what she means by this. Is she talking about the horrors of the game in general? Or is she also lumping in there the romance that blossomed between her and Peeta? Peeta’s next line doesn’t help clarify: he says he doesn’t want to forget. Well, it seems like an odd response, considering the Hell that they went through: him almost dying, the wolf mutts, everything. Sure, having read the books, I know he’s referring to the fact that he doesn’t want to forget the moments he had with Katniss. But it just sounded a little strange and unrealistic. The conversation that happens is completely different in the books. Peeta is angry, betrayed, deeply wounded by the realization that Katniss was just acting. That doesn’t come out at all.

Overall

The problem with the movie is that in trying to stay true to the main plot points, they trimmed off the subtle details that would have pushed this movie to a higher level. Ultimately, as a friend pointed out, they just did not take this movie to the edge. They’re guilty of playing it safe, just like the filmmakers of The Golden Compass. They didn’t deliver, they didn’t commit to that extra mile that would have taken the move from “good” to “amazing”. The ending lacked the tension and the punch that it needed.

Hopefully, when they get a good turnout—and they probably will get a better one than TGC—then they will be able to afford to ramp it up and do what they ought to do with the rest of the series.

~

Hungry for more about The Hunger Games? Check out the posts below!

• The Hunger Games Book Review
• Let the Hunger Games Begin!: Overall review of the movie
• The Hunger Games: Casting and Performance

The Hunger Games: Casting and Performance

How well did the actors of The Hunger Games perform?

Jennifer Lawrence as Katniss Everdeen

However good an actress Jennifer Lawrence is, she just is not Katniss. Whether it was her doing or a choice on the directors, Lawrence just failed to capture Katniss’ crazy badassery. Instead, she’s just a normal person and reacts more like a normal person would: “Ahh! Stuff is happening!” But in the books, Katniss is kind of crazy. Sure, she gets worse over time, but she’s pretty kick ass and I just didn’t get that feeling in the movie.

Another part of that was that Lawrence is just too tall—in my mind, Katniss was petite and wild, in the sense that you almost think, “Napoleon Complex.” Lawrence lacked that fire, that angry energy. She seems almost meek, particularly in the interview when she talks about what she said to Prim: “I swore I would” became “I say I’d try.” Similar phrases and yet the difference between those them is huge.

Josh Hutcherson as Peeta Mellark

Hutcherson was awesome! I have to say, after seeing Journey to the Center of the Earth, I had my doubts. Huge doubts. Peeta is my favorite character, and I was really worried. Did I mention that I was worried? But Hutcherson blew me away. I think he really captured Peeta’s sincerity and love for Katniss. And I think he had the right balance of being decently smart and good with being likeable, and yet he was kind of strangely naïve in other situations (like the berries).

One negative: there weren’t really enough scenes to really do Peeta’s character justice. Most of the cave scenes were cut. I just reread them and all I can say is—they are so much better in the books!  Peeta is more gentle, tender, deliberate in the books, and there are more interactions between them. But I blame the editing more than the acting for that. My boyfriend criticized Peeta's portrayal, saying that in the books, he comes across as smarter and more able than he does in the movie.

Minor Characters

Gale—eh, not really enough scenes to do his character justice yet. On the whole, I thought the other tribute actors did a good job at playing their characters.

The Haymitch and Effie scenes were perfect and provided the comic relief that they needed to.

Overall grade: okay. Some scene-stealers here and there, some underwhelming performances. Perhaps in some respects, anyone portraying Katniss would be disappointing, simply because we cannot get inside her head. On the other hand, other performances might seem better because, unlike Katniss, we weren't inside their heads in the book.

~

Hungry for more about The Hunger Games? Check out the posts below!

• The Hunger Games Book Review
• Let The Hunger Games Begin! Movie Review
• In-Depth Review: The Hunger Games as a Movie Adaptation

Let The Hunger Games Begin!

How was The Hunger Games movie?

The short answer: Well, it was good. But…

And, of course, the long one:

The Hunger Games opened in theaters across the nation tonight.  While my excitement to see the adaptation wasn't quite enough to lead me into a teenage-filled theater on a work night, I was eager to see how Suzanne Collins' first-person dystopian novel would translate to the big screen.

As a story, The Hunger Games is action-packed and shocking enough to make for a captivating film. But part of what makes the books so appealing to readers is the first person narrative, which allows readers to place themselves in Katniss' shoes. However close to the books as the movie may be, it won't be able to completely capture the raw emotion of a first person telling of the story.

The fast paced nature of the book, which leads readers on from cliffhanger to cliffhanger, may be lost in the film.  Part of what makes The Hunger Games a book you just can't put down is Collins' tendency to leave you with a shocking cliffhanger just when you thought you were approaching "a good stopping point." And the next thing you know, it’s five a.m. and you realize you've devoured the entire book over one weekend. Movies are always limited to that two-hour period, so no matter what, it's going to end quickly. But when you finish a whole book in a short amount of time, there's a rush you get, a daze of emotions as the words bounce around in your head and the imagined scenes replay in your mind's eye.

Whenever I saw a preview for one of the Harry Potter movies, I'd get this magical feeling of excitement. Maybe it was the familiar refrain of John Williams' score as the Harry Potter logo flashed across the screen, maybe they just had better commercial editors. But The Hunger Games previews made me apprehensive. I still can't get over that--however good an actress she may be--Jennifer Lawrence just does not look like Katniss. She's too old. Something's missing, it's just not quite right. (But more on that later.)

Last night, I was hopeful that the movie would prove me wrong and would blow me away. I wanted it to. But with a story this brutal and this raw, I was worried about how Hollywood would water it down.

And water it down they did.

There are just some things you can’t portray with a movie, because a camera will always be a third-person perspective. Even if you shoot from the “eyes” of a character, you never get their thoughts or feelings without clumsy voiceover. Katniss’ logic is only something we can guess at when watching her on screen, and on that note, much of the subtext and Katniss’ own confusion about her feelings towards Peeta is completely lost in the film—to my overwhelming disappointment.

Overall, the movie was incredibly slow. I’m not sure how audiences will feel about that because it lacks the traditional action-packed Hollywood punch that movies like The Pirates of the Caribbean have. It’s slow and deliberate, which does a good job to set the mood and atmosphere of the world, but seems like it’s on the opposite end of the spectrum from the tone of the book.

Because it wasn't in first person, a lot of things had to be explained differently, like how the tracker jackers worked. After awhile, a friend thought that these explanation scenes were awkward and interrupted the flow of the action sequences. I do agree with that judgment, but neither of us could think of a better solution.

Ultimately, my conclusion is this: as with any recent book adaptation, the movies are more "supplemental". The books are always going to be better, and you'll get a much better understanding from them, as well as more interesting subtlety and complexity. There are some things a movie just cannot do. 

Yes, go see it. You will probably enjoy it, because, in general, it's good. But it's not great.

~

Hungry for more about The Hunger Games? Check out the posts below!

• The Hunger Games Book Review
• The Hunger Games: Casting and Performance
• In-Depth Review: The Hunger Games Movie as an Adaptation

Game Change as a Commentary on Modern Politics

In recent history, few political figures have been as polarizing as Sarah Palin. On the right, she's fueled extreme conservatives, and on the left, fired up angry liberals. She even scared away moderates, who liked McCain but feared seeing Palin in the White House. So how do you tell her story?

Ask John Heilemann and Mark Halperin, the writers of Game Change. In their book, they set out to deliver a fair and balanced portrayal of the Alaskan governor. Even with that goal, both the movie and book are brutal in their behind-the-scenes take on the candidate's behavior. Yet they were also willing to levy criticism towards her advisers for failing to vet her and failing to capitalize on her strengths while protecting her from her own weaknesses.

Directed by Jay Roach, the movie Game Change, unlike the book, follows the sixty days before election day, beginning with the vetting process. The movie focuses mainly on Sarah Palin, her advisers and the McCain team. Julianne Moore stars as Palin and delivers a phenomenal performance with an almost too perfect accent.

Four years after the election, the movie comes during another stressful time for Republicans, who still struggle to balance rational conservative ideals with extremist concerns that polarize the country, distance liberals and motivate them to even more strongly attack the right.

The movie's portrayal of McCain, in stark contrast to Palin, shows a man willing to move beyond partisan politics during a time when our country is in great need of smart solutions, not career-building deal-making. Early in the movie, Steve Schmidt, adviser to the McCain campaign, says, "John McCain doesn't say what's popular. John McCain puts country first."

"Country first" was McCain's message during his campaign.  As a liberal, I have to say that I was impressed with the portrayal of McCain. In another election, against another candidate and with a better VP candidate--say, Lieberman, who he considered for a long time but ultimately decided against under pressure from other popular Republican figures--he could have united the country. Instead, the country and the Republican party has been divided by the VP candidate he did choose and the many absurd remarks she said throughout the campaign, mainly in regards to Obama's patriotism.

The movie certainly highlights many of Palin's cringe-worthy quotes and ideas. But it also points out the failure of McCain's team to vet her and prepare her. It also portrays her strengths--yes, she has them. She loves working the rope lines, for example, and in those scenes, you must admit she is relatable to many people. When the McCain team expresses concerns over her mental health, they consult a doctor, who ultimately says, "for a woman who's just had a baby, has a pregnant teen daughter, and a son in Iraq, I'd say [she's doing] not half bad."

Of course, whenever you begin to feel sympathy for her, the next scene will have you shaking your head again. For example, when asked about the relationship between England and the United States, Palin says she will do her best to maintain ties with the Queen. Her adviser looks at her and responds, "The Queen is no longer the head of government there." Palin's response: "Who is the head of government?"

Problems with the Process

The movie also highlights the inherent problems that our political system currently faces--a problem that's all too apparent during an election year in which the right has failed to produce a semi-decent challenger to the incumbent president. In a red carpet interview before the movie, Julianne Moore commented, "The movie is about how we pick our leaders, and I think that is a really interesting topic to explore." Interesting is stating it mildly.

When McCain is trying to choose his VP candidate, he goes through several options, but ultimately he is fixated on choosing Lieberman as his running mate. Lieberman is a liberal, but one who has largely been ostracized by his own party (like McCain). He and McCain are close friends. Unfortunately, when the news leaks that he's considering Lieberman, the conservative media nip that idea in the bud. McCain still wants to use Lieberman, but Schmidt says, "[Lieberman as VP] could have a tremendous healing effect on our country. Lieberman is the right thing to do, but the wrong way to win."

The movie also briefly touches on the role of the media in regards to the negative, rampant news stories about Bristol, Troopergate and the Bridge to Nowhere: "No news is meant to be remembered, it's meant to be entertainment," Schmidt says to a distressed Palin. As brief as this scene is, it is certainly a sharp jab at the media industry, but one I feel hits the mark on the nose.

One of the last lines in the movie, and perhaps one of the most telling, says, "I do wish people would elect the next Abraham Lincoln. But that's not how politics works anymore." Unfortunately I'm not sure who said it. But it speaks to the failure of the process. When a campaign is more about saying what needs to be said to collect voters, rather than to say what should be said, then there is a major problem with the system. It's no wonder many people throw their hands up in the air and decide not to take part in that process any more.

Whether you love her or love to hate Palin, watch Game Change. Hopefully it will give you a better insight into the decisions she and the McCain team took. More importantly, hopefully the movie will highlight the inadequacies of the current political system and allow us to address the inadequacies candidly.

Want to learn more? Read our review of Game Change, the book.