When "The Hunger Games" (2012), the film adaptation of the first book, opened to a raucous reaction usually only elicited by the sales at Best Buy on Black Friday there were talks of expanding the trilogy into a tetralogy. I myself, having never read the books, decided to check out the movie to see what the fuss was about. After about two and a half hours of post-apocalyptic child warfare, the lights went back on in the theater, and I still had no idea why people were hooting and hollering over a piece of watered-down, commercialized fluff.
If you've been living under a rock or have had no contact with anyone under the age of 16 for the last few months, "The Hunger Games" takes place in the future country of Panem that is created after the United States collapses. In retaliation for a past rebellion, Panem holds a contest every year in which one boy and one girl from each district is chosen to fight to the death in the titular Hunger Games. Katniss, played by Jennifer Lawrence, volunteers for the Games so her sister, played by Willow Shields, doesn't have to go. Paired with her peer Peeta, played by Josh Hutcherson, the two set off to the Capitol in a literal fight for their lives.
Before I go on, I should bring up my main concern with the film, which is the overarching reason why I don't like it: The core of the film is about children killing other children despite the overt ideological metaphors of Panem (totalitarianism is bad!), Katniss (feminism is heroic!) and Peeta (true love will conquer all!). I didn't realize the full repugnancy of the child warfare plot line until I tried to explain the "Hunger Games" to my father, who recoiled in disgust.
While a bit off-putting, I'm totally fine with the driving plot of the film. My beef with "Hunger Games" lies instead in how saccharine the violence is. It doesn't have to go "Battle Royale" (2000) in its approach to violence a little realism could have gone a long way. There's little to no bloodshed, most of the killings are done off screen and the murders that are shown are either the "bad guys" who kill indiscriminately and aren't so nice to the other contestants, especially Peeta or Katniss' friends. Even their deaths, however, are done with either a quick stab or a horrifying implied off-screen fatality.
One might offer an explanation for the censorship by arguing, "But what about the children! How could they watch something so violent?!" And yes, what about the children? I asked my younger brother, who had read the book, what he thought of the violence, and he said the book was actually more violent, including a scene in which Katniss shoots an arrow through someone's neck. I'm glad they didn't put that scene in the film, however, since the minimal bloodshed of Katniss's victim in the film would have made even a five-year-old call bullsh*t.
What I fail to understand is if kids can read this and imagine the violence, then why on Earth can't it be shown on screen? After all, imagination tends to be more vivid than reality. Unfortunately, in what I suspect to be tending to the lowest common denominator, the filmmakers wanted to appeal to even the most squeamish of readers at the expense of making a truly engrossing film. By this backward logic, "Fifty Shades of Grey" the erotic adaptation of the "Twilight" series should be required reading in high schools.
Violence aside, the film isn't made particularly well. If you're prone to motion sickness, I must warn you that the first 30 minutes or so will be absolute hell for you. The camera moves and shakes so much that I began to wonder whether they shot the film on the San Andreas Fault. Some scenes and sets, like the Capitol, look so green-screened that it's like the film was made following the George Lucas book of filmmaking (hint: that's not good).
Yet, the film does excel in one area: its acting. I must say that Lawrence was perfect for the role of Katniss in her intensity. This is not surprising, however, since Katniss is a flashier version of Lawrence's Oscar-nominated role in "Winter's Bone" (2010). The biggest surprise for me was Lenny Kravitz as Katniss's stylist Cinna, who acts as a formidable advisor and lends gravitas to an otherwise silly movie. Not all the acting choices, however, were good. All I'll say about Hutcherson is that he was as useless as the bags of flour he carries around in the film. The relationship between him and Katniss is like Mario and Princess Peach, except he's the princess and she's the plumber.
