I was surprised I couldn't find a thread for this.

SPOILERS

First spoiler is that I am no good at reviews. So let's start with what I was told before I went;

1) this is an attempt at a new twilight teen saga

2) it was futuristic with an essence of running man, lord of the flies

3) that they focused on character development rather than gore

Ok let's cut to the chase;

Would I recommend it - yes

Does it work with characters more than gore - yes

Is it interesting  from a sci fi point of view - yes

Does it deserve the 98% rating on rotten tomatoes - humm, that is high

So, this is a mature teen flick, which my wife and I went to see.

To be frankly honest I can't be bothered with describing the world they set up but if anything I was impressed with that. The alternatively reality is hard to pull of IMO and keep interest, I felt they did that.

It's one of those films that if you like horror, I would guess you would feel disappointed. If you like gritty drama you may feel disappointed (although not much) but if you allow yourself to drift between them, soak up a fantasy take, it is worth it.

Oh, and you will see it again, twice, just like twilight.

Quoted from Reef Dreamer Oh, and you will see it again, twice, just like twilight.

I had a hard time watching Twilight. I hated it. No way will I watch it twice.

I had planned on seeing HG once the theaters calm down. The book is okay so far. I'm on chapter 6.

Quoted from Grandma Bear I had a hard time watching Twilight. I hated it. No way will I watch it twice. I had planned on seeing HG once the theaters calm down. The book is okay so far. I'm on chapter 6.

Almost the worse part was to see them work hard at being REAL only for the obviously love triange to appear in the last few scenes.

Probably worth seeing the first one.

I went to see this with my 12-year-old (Casey) who more or less insisted that it be seen OPENING DAY and not a moment later.

He loved it, and most of the young fans at the theater seemed to love it, too.  It is a film where lots of people die, sometimes in gruesome ways, but they managed to pull it off with a gore factor that did not bother me for having a kid along.

Me, I was kind of "eh".  This is really a watered-down version of Battle Royale, but I can see how it has its charms for the younger set unfamiliar with a story that has already been told.

I found some of the costuming to be distracting -- the weirdly shaved beards and blue hair and baby-doll makeup just for the sake of being weird kind of bugged me.  I know that is a really odd thing to be bothered by, but something about the costuming was just really off to me.

I was not bored, and the main girl (from Winter's Bone) is a real talent.  There is some really cool stuff with her involving fire that I had not seen before and it worked really well for what they were going for.  I predict good things for this young actress. The rest of the cast was serviceable, but this is her film and she owns it.

Woody Harrelson is the best of the supporting cast by far, but I always kind of like him anyway.  Donald Sutherland who I usually love is just kind of sleepwalking here, but they really do not give him that much to do, either.

How any of this compares to the book, I have no idea.  And it is long, too -- like 2.5 hours.  Not wasted time, but I would not have spent a theater visit on this one if not for the kid.

Going to see HG tomorrow or Monday...can't wait!

im highly skeptical.... ill wait till i hear more reviews from those trust.

Was there yesterday too. I Liked it. I like, Bert, found the costumes riciculous. Almost as over the top as the Fifth Element was in this department.

I know this story is derivitave from so many before it and I hate the premise. So I guess in the future we'll all be cheering for people to kill themselves in games. I will never buy into it. What happened to football, soccer, baseball games that we're so passionate about? Even the blood thirsty UFC fans would be absolutely silenced if someone were to actually die inside the cage. I think its false humanity all the way around. But, if you overlook it...

Helluva good show. Jennifer Lawrence is about to make my laminated list. (I'm sure that's a goal in her life). She makes a great hero here that you can fall behind. She plays her part very well. I especially could read fear in her eyes the moment she was about to be thrown into the games for real. No more pagents, No more huge tables full of ridiculous amounts of food. That was an intense moment.

Not gonna spoil anything, I'm sure many here will hate it, but it was fun to go see something this hyped on opening night and actually enjoy it. I'm sure half of the world will see it by week's end.

James

This film has received a ringing endorsement in both critical and (to this point) commercial terms. There must be something there. I think I'll need to see it a second time to arrive at my final verdict.

A couple of things that stand out (aside from the aforementioned wardrobe malfunctions), include the camera work being inexcusably scruffy (a real copout to suggest that's simply a consequence of diverting attention from the violence) and the forest set was oddly poor considering the pretty fine work constructing the Capitol.

The acting was decent, and while I'd say Jennifer Lawrence was good, the performance lacked the raw talent of say, Jessica Chastain in The Help or even Lawrence's work in Winter's Bone.

In addition, there was some odd editing with a couple of cutaways feeling very jarring. Little things, but they bothered me and took me out of the film. That said, they may have been part of the slightly intoxicating vibe this film emits. Possible.

SPOILERS

Having never read the books, I'm not sure to what degree the film deviates, but there were a few issues I had that need a more assured treatment. First off, Peeta being part of the gang to take down Katniss was handled poorly. We assumed it was a ploy to actually help her (which it obviously was), but the reveal of that motive was a pretty important revelation upon which to hang the development of their love story. When she discovers him disguised as a rock (amusing for all the wrong reasons), their blossoming relationship felt inorganic, even more so when you consider the dangers she faced to help him. Had they properly handled his intentions for ganging up on her, they'd have gained so much more.

Also, Donald Sutherland's interventions lacked any real coherence. Again, this could have been lost in translation, but it prompted the fireball attack that didn't sit well at all. There's a loose reference to hope (and not giving too much) and how this formed part of Sutherland's grip on the districts and justifies (in his mind) forcing Wes Bentley's (awesome beard) hand to foul play and meddling in the game. However, there needed to be more exploration. Otherwise it's just empty.

This is a hotchpotch of Battle Royale (of which much power was directly attributable to the OTT violence and destruction) The Truman Show and The Running Man. Whilst I admire the ambition on show for, lest we forget, a teen movie, it has what my mum would say: eyes too big for its belly. If you're going to caricature a host of dystopian worlds, you're unlikely to yield much originality. Perhaps the book develops this world more fully, but a mistake here was failing to better contextualise (as mentioned above with the Sutherland comment) the reality of children killing one another for society's kicks. In all fairness, that's a far easier sell in print.

There was little to no characterisation of the other tributes, which really hampered the relationship between audience and screen. That was a mistake that deserves attention considering it wasn't a short film. Also, why is there such little conflict with Katniss essentially throwing her boyfriend at home under the bus. If we're supposed to believe this was as a consequence of her playing the game, there needs to be better storytelling. I get that they wanted to make this a subtle film that doesn't guide you through the plot, but you have to compensate for lack of clarity. Aside from Katniss staring thoughtfully into the woods, there was no real attempt to externalise those internal thoughts.

Not bad, but certainly baffling to see such grandiose praise.

Cool factoid I forgot for those who have not read the book:

My kid tells me there were actually 21 of those "demon dog" things in the book -- and that (somehow) they had the eyes and some remnants of the consciousness of the dead tributes.

No, he did not explain it all that well -- but it sure seems like a wasted opportunity, as these dog-things are pretty throwaway in the actual film.

They could have been 1000% cooler had the script touched on this angle, no?

Quoted from bert Cool factoid I forgot for those who have not read the book: My kid tells me there were actually 21 of those "demon dog" things in the book -- and that (somehow) they had the eyes and some remnants of the consciousness of the dead tributes. No, he did not explain it all that well -- but it sure seems like a wasted opportunity, as these dog-things are pretty throwaway in the actual film. They could have been 1000% cooler had the script touched on this angle, no?

SPOILERS

Yeah, there's a truly chilling moment in the novel when Katniss looks at one of the muttations and realises it's Rue staring back at her.

Will try to see the film next week, but I think it'll struggle to match the book. In the book you really get a sense of Katniss' steely determination to get back home for her sister, and her growing revulsion for and hatred towards the Capitol as she struggles on, often entirely alone. She has no idea what's going on outside or even in other locations inside the Games, and that's what gives the book it's punch - the sense of isolation and self-reliance, and the numb, emotionally-shut-down writing style. What it ISN'T is a reality TV satire, which is the angle they seem to have focussed on in the film. Also, how can you fairly depict teenagers killing each other and still get a PG-13 rating? Sanitising it and making it palletable is sort of...wrong, isn't it? Although I know Lionsgate needed that rating to maximise their box office.

As I say, I haven't seen it. Will witter on more when I have.

Read the book, thought the movie did it justice. While one is about isolation, the other is more split between the outside world and what's happening there, which was an interesting spin. Besides some minor things I wish they would have included, one major change annoyed me Spoiler (Peeta was supposed to loose his bad leg). Overall I like it and would recommend to anyone.

Quoted from JonnyBoy How can you fairly depict teenagers killing each other and still get a PG-13 rating? Sanitising it and making it palletable is sort of...wrong, isn't it? Although I know Lionsgate needed that rating to maximise their box office.

George Lucas sanitized Anakin killing all those young Jedi pupils, and that is even more heinous than same aged people whacking each other IMO.  Amazing what they can get away with to achieve a rating.

I doubt I'll see this movie in the theater.  DVD from the library some day.

Finally got around to seeing this. I put it off for a few reasons: I've seen the premise a hundred times before. where it's simply another variation of The Most Dangerous Game and I've seen The Condemned, Mean Guns and Battle Royale...The Running Man...Hard Target

Good stuff, bad stuff. And I'll see all that stuff again at some point I'm sure.
But on to Hunger Games.

I wound up liking 80 percent of it, most of it dealing with the first hour before the kids begin the games. I asked myself why do some kids form alliances when they know at some point it will be everyone for themselves? I haven't read the books. I'm sure it's explained. I was getting interested in how things work in The Capital. When something is shown to me, however, I didn't think it was neat. I thought what's that all about? "Creating" creatures (muttations) and, thus, possibly the medicines that "magically" crop up. Don't the other kids get special favors? To me it felt a bit of a cheat in storytelling.

But there was that horrid reminder of why some characters are bland and why things don't add up. It is a first in a series of movies, after all.

I did like Jennifer Lawrence a lot though. I also liked (shock!) Wes Bentley and his magician like beard. Even Lenny Kravitz was alright.

Overall, I liked the film.
I didn't love it.

Someone mentioned Fifth Element's future clothing. That film got away with it to an extent because the tone of the film was a bit on a light action comedy with a zany sci-fi tale thrown in. Hunger Games I also excused, because I had the feeling that The Capital had a dark fascination with Robert A. Heinlein and especially Lewis Carrol. In fact, I was kind of wondering if Stan Tucci was a Mad Hatter and Elizabeth Banks was The Red Queen. (Lawrewnce, of course, the new Alice)

The love triangle is a joke. I don't buy that there is one. I do accept that it does give motivation for one character to rebel against The Captial because he can't love Katriss due to Capital Propaganda. That is more interesting than setting up a lame "love triangle".

I also don't want to hear complaints on how we will never get a US remake of Battle Royale because of Hunger Games. It's one less remake to deal with.

And like I said, we'll get the same/simular premise a hundred times more down through the years. Maybe sooner than later now, but still...

4wks at BO. The Lionsgate folks are keeping thier jobs. Unlike Disney folks.
(and I loved John Carter, BTW)

Just caught this... for what it is, the movie's pretty good.
I dug that they didn't try to fancy it up, just tell an honest, linear tale.

Character development suffers, but not completely.
They make up for some of that with Tucci and Harrelson.
The production design annoyed me more than anything else.
The Haves candy coated Running Man hand me downs got stale super fast.

This is miles better than the Twilight franchise for me.
Hunger Games is action oriented with clear goals and high personal stakes.
A well crafted piece of entertainment for the masses that manages to be decent too.

I hope future tween franchises skew much closer to this than the shiny vamps.

E.D.

I read/listened to the book, then saw the film and then read the books again. I still liked the books better than the film...

I did like the story, sort of. The one thing, I could never get over was the fact that people are watching these Hunger Games. If I lived in Panem, I would refuse to watch these barbaric games. Why doesn't everyone that doesn't live in the capital refuse to watch it? That was my biggest issue with this. Other than that, I understand and like the need to survive.