Escape to the Movies: The Hunger Games

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT
 

My only problem with the review is he is critisizing things that couldn't be changed, which makes less interested in the review. If he wants to critisize the source material, he probably should read it. I am going to see it with a group next weekend. I am not the core audience, but I don't mind, and I read the books. Names, places, concepts, are all driven from the books. I like name changes, heck it is FICTION, and it's an American movie, so I am happy they spoke English. Did you critisize Star wars for Han, Obi Wan, Mace, when they all spoke "English?" Oh and the setting, I may be be biased, I liked it, oh ya, it was filmed next to me.. haha.. I almost was in it, actually I could be in it, who knows..

Was MovieBob playing Yahtzee with Katniss Bella Potter's name?!
That's hella funny.

OT:
It's production value didn't look that bad in the comercials.
I think I'm going to let myself dragged into seeing this movie.

OOT:
It seems like using the "stupid evil" critique doesn't mean anything anymore, especial when we had a president (cough cough Bush cough cough) who described our 3rd world enemies in an unjustifiable war, "The axis of evil".

Whytewulf:
My only problem with the review is he is critisizing things that couldn't be changed, which makes less interested in the review. If he wants to critisize the source material, he probably should read it.

Some things in books or comics don't translate well on the big screen, so changes should be made to make it more feasible for the average movie going audience who hasn't read the books. As long as it keeps the main themes of the story and it's characters, than changes should be welcome.

"Watching a mid 1990's Nickelodeon pilot-"

Harsh... considering that all the movies I ever saw that were 'live' by Nickelodeon really blew so just because of this I will never bother watching The Hunger Games. Also it reminds me way to much of Twilight.. the way the characters play out and so forth Mm.

Besides that, I think what really held this movie back was the label PG 13. How can you make a movie about kids hunting and trying to kill one another PG 13? That doesn't make sense to me.. Even Mass Effect 3 with the label rated M doesn't have much going on to be considered rated M other then having the f word here and there.

I'll take your word for it Bob but I am starting to worry a bit about yah. Some things you've said about the gaming community is a bit 'cold' in my eyes but I won't just stop watching your videos because of it.. yet I wanted to address that since I do take your word in most cases.

Not surprised to hear it wasn't very good. There's a few people at my work who won't shut up about the books, but I don't know much about it to be honest. Looks like something I won't pay much attention to. Thanks for the review, Bob.

Qitz:
Smart move with the flame suit and iron bunker there Bob.

After what happened last tuesday on the forums, who wouldn't make a flamewars shelter.

Looks like I'm going to go watch it because I'm a sheep. But seriously, this isn't even going to be retarded? Just boring?

I feel the need to compare my expectations of it to Twilight, which went out of its way to be mind-bogglingly stupid and to dare its male and/or rational audience members to tell its fans how ridiculously those movies suck. But all we get here is a less interesting Harry Potter? Gah. As I said, I have been won over by advertising like a lot of other people who will see this movie (unless there's anything better out this weekend), so take heart that the fall of western civilization has long since occurred.

Edit: Yep. That was dull. Not interesting, not unintentionally bad. The 'wacky' parts weren't very wacky and the Truman Show elements seemed forced and uninspired. The forest scenes were kinda fun when the kids weren't mooning over each other, but that's about ten minutes of the movie overall.

Whytewulf:
My only problem with the review is he is critisizing things that couldn't be changed, which makes less interested in the review. If he wants to critisize the source material, he probably should read it.

thing is, the things he's criticizing were major problems in the book too. opening up the world beyond Kats perspective was something the story definitely needed, and without those additions there is absolutely no excuse for this movie being 2 1/2 HOURS while still managing to be impenetrable to non-fans.

I think that all the success stories of books becoming movies have led producers to think they can just churn out a licensed movies and assume people will watch it. And they will, partly cuz that's the way it's always been, and partly because there have been so many good licensed movies lately.

"...the big draaaw..."

Heh, nice timing. :)

Considering the book itself loved a first person perspective (this doesn't transfer to movies well and even Fight Club had to work around this to achieve the same impact the book had) that really put an emphasis on how the not very talkative protagonist saw everything around her in her thoughts, and the extreme brutality of it all, I never really thought this movie could turn out that great.

Still, to hear that it turned out THIS badly is a bit sad, as the books were an enjoyable (if not too fulfilling) read.

canadamus_prime:

I know which one you meant. Do you really think that matters? I still foresee torrents of outraged fans decrying it because it didn't live up to their personal (and extremely outrageous) expectations.

I don't know what people will come up with to complain about the comparison of this movie to the book, but since you are making your comment in relation to how people reacted to the Eragon movie, I have to say the people complaining about it weren't running one outrageous expectations.

The problem with Eragon was that the numb-nuts that made the movie, didn't read the book or get any notes about it or something, because the mistakes they made are ones that anybody with a half a brain could get right.

Since you didn't read the books, I'll just bring two points because it's all I need:

1.) The Urgals:

This is an illustration from the actual guide to the books.

This is what they look like in the movie.

I could tell the director was a moron when he said that making them properly would cost too much money, and especially so when he said he wanted to do them a little differently. There is no little about that.

2.) Brom's death:

In the book, the Ra'zac(those black robbed creatures that followed Brom and Eragon in the movie), killed Brom(he jumped in front of a dagger one of them threw at Eragon). But, in the film, Brom gets the jump on them and kills them both. By changing that fact when making the movie, they effectively killed the possibility to continue on to make the other books into movies, until the first movie gets a remake, because the Ra'zac play a major role throughout the books.

Again, it isn't outrageous expectations; it is just plain fact. It is really a good example of if they can't make a movie somewhat proper compared to the book, they shouldn't even try.

I've asked fans of this book what its about and if its worth while to read or if its worth while to see the movie to see if i should get into the books (which is usually the opposite of my process) and everyone of them either mentioned nothing of value, tried to give me the entire book history, or just said read the book, and when that happens, that tells me that this wont be very good.

so yeah. Really im just waiting to see how long it takes till the twilight comparisons really lay on i guess.

canadamus_prime:
Oh boy, it's going to be Eragorn all over again.

*Eragon. Sadly it looks like your right though.

So its battle royale...but all the violence and grit toned down to saccharine levels, any sort of social commentary or satire reduced to broad, heavy handed, done-before-and-done-better metaphors, with a love story crammed in and targeted toward young girls?

So it's battle royale as written by stephenie meyer?

Movie Bob had a few good points about the film I have read in other review. I feel I am going to have to disagree with him on this one. Much like He loved Captain America, while I thought it was pretty subpar.

So... I haven't read the book(s), have zero interest in the movie and I'm more than willing to take Bob at face value regarding the cinematic value of it being very low.

But.

But did anybody else feel that Bob here sounded a bit like a non-nerd finding pretty basic issues with nerdy things in properties he's not into? I mean, by the logic being established, most of what we've seen of The Avengers looks outright dumb, even with half a dozen movies trying to explain why the government would even consider to put together a supergroup including a seventy year old in tights, a drunken industrialist in a walking tank and a rampaging monster.

Led by a guy called "Nick Fury".

And I'm right there with Bob, a lot of this stuff sounds either pretty dumb or a ripoff of decades-old tropes, but I'm down with a lot of crap that answers to that description, so besides the film being long and boring, the long string of basic complaints about the fiction seemed out of place.

I'll leave you with an example.

I don't see the point in Harry Potter. The universe is ill-defined, there is no reason why bad Latin would have magical properties and the plot ultimately makes zero sense.

But I've never had a problem with the movies sticking to those concepts. The fact that about six out of the eight films are slow, boring, overlong and lacking in character development for the sake of a dumb whodunit I do hold against them, but not the (from what I understand) fairly decent depiction of a fictional universe that I never found appealing to begin with.

Hopefully that was reasonable and measured enough to result in Bob getting the point I'm trying to make. Most likely I'll be flamed at by fans of The Avengers, The Hunger Games AND Harry Potter.

You know its kinda funny that its always compared to Battle royale, but you know this is not a new concept. This idea was back in the roman times with the gladiator combat, and older films like Ben-Hur. Besides if you really want to nitpick the idea was done on Running man before both films.

Noelveiga I could not have put it better, I think your 100% right about how these things exist in other films Movie Bob and others like. Movie Bob is just picking at it cause its really not something he is into, and I am sure like you said if you go and look some some other Sc-fi and comic book type movies they are guilty of the same thing.

emeraldrafael:
I've asked fans of this book what its about and if its worth while to read or if its worth while to see the movie to see if i should get into the books (which is usually the opposite of my process) and everyone of them either mentioned nothing of value, tried to give me the entire book history, or just said read the book, and when that happens, that tells me that this wont be very good.

so yeah. Really im just waiting to see how long it takes till the twilight comparisons really lay on i guess.

it's Battle Royale targeted at an age group unlikely to have ever encountered Battle Royale. it's written in a first-person present tense style that works like gangbusters when the protagonist is in mortal danger(which is often), and these points in the narrative seem to excuse(at least in the minds of the fanbase) the moments when this style cuts off any hope of character development for any character not in the protagonist love-triangle(this becomes a significant issue later when what should be a gut-wrenching emotional moment in the third book falls completely flat due to the fact that Collins never bothered to develop what should have been a major character). the books are very flawed(ask any fan over the age of twelve about Crazy Cat), and everything before the beginning of the first Hunger Games felt like it needed editing(a flaw that's evidently been transferred whole-cloth into the film), at no point does it reach the level of painful incompetence and terrifying social perspective that Twilight's known for. i'd say don't bother reading them, except that if you have anything resembling a decent reading speed, it shouldn't take you more than one to three weeks to burn through all three books.

Catfish Jellybean? I get a feeling that will make watching this movie (wife wants to see it) so much more enjoyable now.

Falseprophet:
I tend to agree with Bob on movies 90% of the time, but when we disagree, we really disagree. Guess I'll find out on Sunday which way it will go. Though I suspect being a fan of the books, I might be more charitable.

CronoT:
At least Eragon had the Dungeons & Dragons fantasy motif to fall back on. This is just an inferior copy of several much better ideas.

Most unintentionally hilarious thing I've read all day. Cheers.

I know, right? I was trying to find a way to say something without a dick about it, so good job on that.

Risking being burned but the rage of a million fans, I am going to put this here:

All the problem Bob has with this movie, all of them, are the same problem I have with the books. In the end, even the premise needs a considerable amount of suspension of disbelief to take seriously and, while they explain some issues in them, the explanations are not very good to start with. In the end, they are entertaining but rather shallow, especially when compared with other similar books and movies that are far more successful in being referential.

beetrain:
First time I've heard anything about the plot.
So, what IS all the fuss about?

Because the books has 2 things in their favor:
- They are pretty violent considering its target audience.
- They are a lot better at creating a strong female lead (without falling in most common traps of making a strong female lead), especially when compared with other books aimed at its target audience.

Colour me.... unsurprised.

Damn, Bobby- you're really good at selling your case about movies. Won't repeat any of it though, my roommate is a fan of the books.

Just saw this, I thought it was actually rather well adapted. My question is if bob actually read the book, there were deviations, but for the most part they stayed true to it.

Also, Katniss is a much stronger female lead then most we've had recently... better than Bella from Twilight.

Didn't read the books, and frankly have no desire to see this.
I feel like I'm the only one. Oh well.

This makes me sad. I was looking forward to watching Jennifer Lawrence playing Catfish Jellybean.

Oh well...thanks Bob for saving me another €15!

Hah! Sounds like Moviebob lifted some of Yahtzee's shtick with the "repeatedly mispronouncing a name wrong in different ways" thing ^^

Also, it sounds a little bit like he isn't the target audience for this movie. Haven't seen it myself or read any of the books for that matter, but it seems to me like it's meant to be enjoyed by someone who's a lot less familiar with story telling conventions.

That's not how you shoot a bow...

hermes200:
Risking being burned but the rage of a million fans, I am going to put this here:

All the problem Bob has with this movie, all of them, are the same problem I have with the books. In the end, even the premise needs a considerable amount of suspension of disbelief to take seriously and, while they explain some issues in them, the explanations are not very good to start with. In the end, they are entertaining but rather shallow, especially when compared with other similar books and movies that are far more successful in being referential.

beetrain:
First time I've heard anything about the plot.
So, what IS all the fuss about?

Because the books has 2 things in their favor:
- They are pretty violent considering its target audience.
- They are a lot better at creating a strong female lead (without falling in most common traps of making a strong female lead), especially when compared with other books aimed at its target audience.

I've only read the first book, but hell, it's more [graphically] violent than a number of ostensibly violent "adult" books I've read.

Seconded on the female lead thing.

Wes Bentley? Wait a minute, he's holding a camera, like the OCD cocaine hoarder from American Beauty?
*checks out the Flixter with Rotten Tomatoes app*
Why, yes he is that character! This is the second time a movie I've seen in my Survey of Motion Pictures (an intro class to knock off a fine arts requirement) has shown up randomly in an online video I watched!

The other movie suddenly referenced was with none other than Citizen Kane, especially with that strong, apathetic clapping scene.

Eh. I feel like if there was ever a movie that reading the book beforehand is required, this is that movie. I think the movie probably would have benefited more from a higher rating.

And just because I feel like it's necessary to point out:

1. Yes, the game makers do control the weather and can conjure natural disasters, weird animal mutations, etc.

2. According to the books, the only kids who actively train to be killing machines are the Careers, aka the kids from Districts 1 and 2, but those districts are the Capitol's favorites, so they buy in to the "fight for fame and fortune" propaganda, and they have the luxury of actually being able to train. Everyone else is just worked to death and is too busy surviving to worry about training for the upcoming Hunger Games. Katniss is an exception, she and Gale are the only ones with the balls to leave the District borders.

3. I've read both the Twilight series and the HG series, and would say that HG is a million times better. At least HG tries to handle serious themes (although they may come off anvilicious) whereas Twilight is pretty mindless.

PG-13 for a Battle Royal rip-off?

Bwhahahahahahhahah...ha...ha?
Nah, I'm skip this.

All I was thinking the entire review was "Wait, didn't Battle Royale do this exact thing ten years ago?"

After watching the entire video, all that emphasis on the flame shields in the beginning comes across more like you were just giving yourself a pass to amp up the nitpicking to be as contrary as possible with every other review I've seen so far.

Really, when a review of a single movie essentially reads like an overall discrediting of the entire franchise rather than just the movie, it makes you look like you're just reaching for a reason to break out the soapbox again, Bob.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here