Screen Rant’s Ben Kendrick reviews The Hunger Games
Following the conclusion of the Harry Potter and Twilight book series, which wrapped-up in 2007 and 2008 respectively, Suzanne Collins’ The Hunger Games became the next “big thing” for young adult fiction readers. However, much like the darker themes presented in the later Harry Potter installments, The Hunger Games explores some especially heavy material – making it a go-to book series for not just young adults, but plenty of readers who also enjoy deeper literary offerings. As a result, it’s no surprise that The Hunger Games film adaptation has, for some time, been one of the most anticipated movie events of 2012 – setting records for pre-release ticket sales and opening weekend sold-out shows.
That said, does writer/director Gary Ross (Seabiscuit and Pleasantville – not to mention writing credits on Big, Dave, and Mr. Baseball) ultimately deliver a Hunger Games film adaptation that accurately transports fan-favorite characters and events onto the big screen – as well as offering up an entertaining movie experience for audience members who haven’t bothered with the books?
Despite a few hiccups that come with distilling a 350 page book (told in first person) into a two hour and twenty minute film, The Hunger Games is not only a solid adaptation of the source material – it succeeds at covering a copious amount of backstory, while at the same time delivering some genuinely entertaining (and at times, thrilling) moments, even for those who are still unfamiliar with the book series. The Hungers Games books are jam-packed with supporting characters and in-depth mythos – and so is the film adaptation (at times to a fault).
The basic story takes place in a dystopian future where the Capitol rules over the country of Panem (in what used to be North America) – and uses “The Hunger Games” to suppress the surrounding districts. Each year, the Capitol randomly selects one girl and boy from each of the twelve districts to participate in the Hunger Games – where the 24 “tribute” children fight to the death until only one remains.
Katniss (Jennifer Lawrence) and Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) in 'The Hunger Games'
When young Primrose Everdeen is chosen as tribute at the District 12 “reaping,” her big sister, Katniss (Jennifer Lawrence), volunteers to fight in her place. Katniss is joined by fellow District 12 tribute, Peeta (Josh Hutcherson), a strong but insecure baker’s son, and the two embark on a (one way?) trip to the Capitol to face off against the other district tributes (as well as one another). However, with guidance from District 12 resident (and previous Hunger Games winner) Haymitch Abernathy (Woody Harrelson), stylist Cinna (Lenny Kravitz), and chaperone Effie Trinket (Elizabeth Banks), Katniss and Peeta quickly discover that to survive the games they’ll need more than just fast feet and good aim.
The central storyline from the books remains intact for the film adaptation, as Katniss attempts to make sense of her situation – both in terms of attempting to survive the Hunger Games (inside and outside of the arena), as well as the difference between illustrious Capitol life and the stark poverty she experienced back home in District 12. Katniss requires a lot from Lawrence (both physically and emotionally) and, as usual, the actress delivers a good, nuanced performance. While the role isn’t likely to get her another “Best Actress” nomination at the Oscars, she does more with this genre piece than most of her peers might have attempted (just as she did with Mystique in X-Men: First Class).
There’s little doubt that some moviegoers will dismiss The Hunger Games as the next Twilight saga – in terms of the quality of the acting and production values. However, as we addressed in our article detailing “5 Facts About ‘The Hunger Games’ Movie for Those Who Haven’t Read the Books,” Ross actually lined up a lot of top-tier acting talent (up-and-comers as well as Hollywood veterans) to ground the horrific events depicted in The Hunger Games with believable (and meaningful) performances. Hutcherson (as fellow tribute Peeta) also succeeds in keeping up with Lawrence – presenting one of the more interesting characters in the film (even with a pink-haired Elizabeth Banks and drunk Woody Harrelson running around); Hutcherson also delivers during a pair of especially contemplative moments.
Josh Hutcherson as Peeta Mellark in 'The Hunger Games'
Unfortunately, even Peeta isn’t safe from the book-to-film adaptation process – as many side characters are left entirely undeveloped or presented with somewhat muddled motivations. The scope of the film leaves some character actions and motivations a bit vague, which will cause non-fans to leave the theater with a mixed impression of who they are. In the case of Peeta, despite a full character arc that works on the surface level, his in-arena motivations aren’t nearly as cohesive (or as interesting) as they are in the source material. In addition, the “Mockingjay,” which has major thematic importance (not to mention practical application) in the book series goes almost entirely undeveloped in the film, and despite a lot of onscreen time that’s spent on the subject, doesn’t ever come full-circle. These aren’t just “adaptation” nitpicks, in terms of what is shown on screen – the film leaves plotholes that could be confusing for general audiences (given the time that was spent setting them up).
Similarly, with one or two exceptions, the non-District 12 tributes are mostly just blank caricatures that leave next-to-no emotional impact as either victims or villains. Obviously, with 24 tributes, not to mention a number of non-Games side characters, it would be hard to get to know everyone (a lot of the kids are throwaways in the book); however, as a film (as opposed to a book – where Katniss is limited to first person), the experience could have benefited from a bit more time spent with a few other tributes – so that as they attempt to slaughter (or help) Katniss, they’d have more impact than just the immediate onscreen action. It’s a tricky balance, and though the director succeeds overall, there are times when The Hunger Games seems more concerned with building up the larger world in preparation for a sequel, than fully serving some of the moments and characters featured in the current installment. That said, Ross does succeed in utilizing the film medium for the better, such as when he makes up for the lack of Katniss’ internal thoughts by smartly implementing external sources for much needed exposition (via the game announcers and production team).
District 1 and 2 Tributes: Clove, Cato, Marvel, and Glimmer
It needs to be said that some moviegoers – those expecting an epic action movie experience – may also find that the film drags (especially in Act 2), given the lengthy run time. Anyone interested in the series mythos will be sated by seeing book characters re-imagined on the big screen, but prior to the actual Hunger Games, there are very few (read: zero) large-scale action pieces to break up all the world-building and exposition. Patient moviegoers will enjoy plenty of intriguing character drama, but there’s no doubt that the film (like the books) relies heavily on the back end to hit its action quota. Ultimately, action fans may still be underwhelmed by the actual Games themselves.
Quick, frantic cuts probably helped the film maintain a PG-13 rating, given all the teenagers that die on camera, but as a result, the film is short on captivating battle choreography or epic one-on-one confrontations. Instead of large-scale action set pieces, The Hunger Games movie presents a story about Katniss surviving (and often hiding) – not outright hunting down her fellow tributes – and because of that, the Games portion (despite loads of tense moments) could prove to be underwhelming. In the end, the film is better off for the restraint that Ross employs – since it keeps the focus on Katniss and her plight (not over-the-top CGI explosions) – but it will limit the entertainment value of the onscreen action for some moviegoers.
As the first installment in what will be a four-part film series (based on a three-part book series), Ross has done a solid job establishing the series’ major players, as well as the ins and outs of Panem society. Ultimately the director crams a lot of quality content into the film’s two-hour twenty-minute runtime – though some plot threads, scenes, and characters are underserved by the movie’s conclusion. While The Hunger Games is not a non-stop fight-to-the-death action film, it succeeds at being something even more interesting – a fascinating and disturbing (not to mention tense) character drama that successfully captures the core themes of the book.
If you’re still on the fence about The Hunger Games, check out the trailer below:
-
Loading ...-
For an in-depth discussion of the film by the Screen Rant team check out our Hunger Games episode of the SR Underground podcast.
If you want to discuss details about the film without worrying about spoiling it for those who haven’t seen it, please head over to our Hunger Games Spoiler Discussion!
Follow me on Twitter @benkendrick - and let us know what you thought of the film below.
The Hunger Games is rated PG-13 for intense violent thematic material and disturbing images – all involving teens. Now playing in theaters.
Our Rating:
4 out of 5
Stephen King ‘Zombie’ Film ‘Cell’ To Be Directed by ‘Paranormal Activity 2′ Helmer 
‘Arrow’ Season 1 Finale Review 
J.J. Abrams Planned ‘Star Trek’ TV Show; Rights Issues Led to Jump to ‘Star Wars’? 
‘Riddick’ Full Trailer: Riddick Gets Unchained (Plus New Images) 
very cool. I expected there would be some hicups with the book to screen adaptation, as there always is. It’s good to hear that the actors have more or less done justice for the characters that I’ve grown attatched to through the books.
No, no they haven’t. Josh Hutchinson is a terrible actor, the scenes seem forced. The actor who plays Gale looks like he’s 30. At the end of the first book, Katniss is basically an animal in her thinking and the way her hair is nasty, her body is dirty. Not in the movie! Apparently you can keep your hair nice and flow-y and your face clean while murdering and hunting and getting chased by fire. *coughbullcough* This movie sucked.
I agree and disagree. I think Josh had the “self-depreciating humor” of Peeta even though thats not how i picutred him. over all i was terribly dissapointed by the movie and the connection with Katniss and Peeta was poorly done. I’d say that Josh did a good job for what he had to work with though. I could almost feel it from him, but even though Jennifer fit the look of Katniss, I felt that it was really fake from her.
I enjoy some of Hutcherson’s work. He was good in “Zathura” and “The Kids Are Alright”. I think he was okay here too. I didn’t mind the connection shared by Peeta and Katniss in this movie either.
I disagree about Jennifer Lawrence though. I thought she was fantastic. Overall, the film omitted a lot of important things from the first book, including characters, the explanation of the mockingjays significance as a symbol, etc. If anything, the connection between Rue and Katniss was underdeveloped. Even so, the scene where Rue gets killed is very emotionally potent.
Overall, the games were a bit rushed.
[spoilers]
The film didn’t show Katniss’s desperation to find water. We never saw the Capital drain the ponds and lakes of water to mess with the contestants. Draining the water sources affected Katniss in two major ways in the books: She wasn’t able to bathe, and more importantly, her health took a huge dive because she was nearing dehydration. On that same note, we were never shown how severe Katniss’s hunger was getting. The book made it clear that food was scarce thanks to the games’ engineers.
If the movie had shown all that stuff, then I would have been more upset that Katniss looked so composed and pretty and put together at the end of the film. But the movie didn’t go that route.
Instead, the film made it seem as though Katniss’s hunting skills were perfectly adequate to sustain her appetite in the arena. That took care of not having to show her severe weight loss and the health problems associated with that. By tweaking the story so that Katniss didn’t have to deal with fluctuating water sources, the movie covered itself for not showing Katniss’s reduced hygiene throughout the games and her struggles with dehydration.
So because of that, the condition of her hair, the cleanliness of her face and her overall health didn’t come off as absurd to me. I do, however, wish the movie had actually included those details. But given what was shown, I think her condition at the end of the film made sense. In my opinion, the games still looked very visceral and barbaric.
[spoilers]
Totally agree with you Luci, this movie was a poor effort – how it got 4 stars I will never know!
My biggest complaint was the shaky cam scenes. They were jarring and made my head hurt for some time afterward. I was quite thankful they were not employed throughout the whole film.
I know they were cut because they didn’t add anything to the story, but I miss the prep team.
How are the prep team not in the movie? They have quite a big part in the third book.
We have an article coming out later today that points out the differences between the book and the film.
Vic
Not just prep team, they left out sooo much from the book! I would of rather of them made all the books broken into two movies than watched them rush through one of the greatest books ever!
I disagree. Gary Ross said it was too much to focus on all the prep team and he needed to make Cinna central so he focused on Cinna. The rest of the team is still there, but I was ok with them being put in the background.
There are always going to be changes/omissions from a book to a film. Knowing the things that were left out were done so at Suzanne Collins consent and/or suggestion is just fine with me.
They didnt even go in depth with Cinna and Katniss’s relationship. It was just so thrown together. I read all the books and went with two people who hadnt read and they were so lost.
I was so disspointed the prep team wasnt a focus.
i feel like you didnt get a good grasp of katniss bouncing back from gale to peeta and seeing the struggle in it.
i was overall kind of dissapointed
even the whole mockingjay pin part. it was frustrating after loving the book so much and feeling like no one understands the characters if you havent read it.
I agree. Cinna was barely touched upon, and the prep team should have been a focus simply because of such a large part they will play in the third film. Gale just seemed like a jealous jerk because it was never said that Katniss might have feelings for him. I understand that some things will get cut out in the move from book to screen. But everything?
I don’t think Gale seemed like a jealous jerk in the movie. It is at least understood in the film that he knows Katniss very well, and he doesn’t want to give the Capital the satisfaction of watching her fight for her life. His dialogue in the film did include a statement or two about intentionally “not watching the games”.
i agree. i loved the books but was extremely disappointed with the movie. it did a poor job of explaining the feelings the districts have towards the hunger games and also why they choose children to play in the games. those who saw the movie and didn’t see the book were left with a lot of unanswered questions. also, gale had almost no part and peeta and katniss’ relationship was lacking. it didn’t even make the point that katniss only loved peeta for the games! so disappointed. hope the next one is better!
I may be confusing my reading of the book with my viewing of the movie, but I could’ve sworn that Haymitch told Katniss to pretend she was in love with Peeta. I took my fiance to see it, who hasn’t read the books, and she said it was clear to her that Katniss wasn’t trying to lead Peeta on; that she went along with the star crossed lovers gimmick to save their lives.
I went to the bathroom before they entered the games, and i saw my friend in there throwing up. Granted she was sitting near the front, but that’s just awful.
I saw it at midnight. I thought it was a very good film adaptation of the book, and I loved every second of it. I’m a big fan of the books, but I always felt like some of the scenes during the games seemed rush. But that may be because that’s what I pictured, and didn’t realized how fast-paced it all really was. But still, very good film. 4 1/2 stars, imo.
Like I’ve said in the Open Discussions thread a few hours ago, I haven’t finished the first book yet (waiting to see the movie first), so I don’t really want any spoilers…
That said, I risked it and skimmed through the review and it looks pretty convincing: I’ll definitely go see it as soon as it’s released here in SA.
P.S. If there weren’t any huge spoiled in the review, please let me know, I’d love to give it a decent read through…
I wouldn’t read the review until you’ve seen the movie because there are a few spoilers. But you will enjoy it. It is awesome. I saw it at midnight last night.
Thanks
Avenger – I tried to stay away from them as best I could but since it is an adaptation of the book, it’s hard not to point out a few things (for the sake of comparison). I don’t think the review spoils anything big but if you’re trying to go in as a complete blank slate… best to read it once you’ve seen the film!
Would it be possible for somebody who hasn’t read the books to give a review. I’m still not entirely sure that the film stands on its own without the books. comparing characters and scenes/plotpoints with the book isn’t very helpful. Read in the comments that Ross chose to use alot shakycam and constant closeup shots, could u comment on this?
well I’ve seen the movie and haven’t read any of the books…I thought the movie was just okay…throughout the movie I kept waiting for it to live up to all the hype and marketing and I was disappointed…overall I give it 3.5 stars out of 5…I’m still baffled on how her hair managed to stay perfectly stlyed from her ordeal during the games…explosions…fireball…hand to hand combat…lol…would I recommend the movie?…probably not…watch the sequel?..maybe if someone offers to pay for me…..lol…mediocre movie…
You did an excellent job. thank you for your review!
Great review – I was already sold on this movie but the points you made – the action being restrained, some unexplained background – are still worth knowing going in.
What I want to know is – do you think this is worth watching IMAX? I know it wasn’t filmed in the format, but would this lend itself well to an IMAX screening, still? I want to try out a properly before TDKR comes out bit obviously I’d like to watch a film that fits it well (having missed MI4 in IMAX) Thanks!
Nick – I personally don’t think so. There are probably some cool shots that would benefit from the IMAX scale but… they’d be few and far between. In general, the film offers a lot more character moments than action moments.
Alright, thanks! I guess I’ll hold out for IMAX on another outing then…I’ll still definitely catch this though.
I saw it in XD at the midnight showing and there was more than one person in the bathroom (one of whom was a friend of mine) throwing up because of the shaky filming and quick cuts. So i wouldn’t recomend it either.
I for one thought the movie was quite good. I am proud to say it was filmed in asheville, NC, about an hour away from where I live. True district 12 Citizen!!! But anyways I loved the movie and would see it again and again if I could. The only problem I had about it was that they could have shown more fighting. I was expecting a lot more action. But what was given was satisfactory. I guess thats all that can be given with a PG-13 rating. I also have to say that Cato was pretty brutal and savage which was awesome. For anyone who hasn’t seen it yet because they are unsure about whether it will be worth their money, I can say it definitely is worth the money
cant wait for the movie. read the first and reading the second. i started less than a week ago cant put these down. i am unsettled that peeta is somewhat underdeveloped as he is my favorite charactor.
I thought the director did an excellent job on the film. Obviously there are going to be some parts left out, but this happens wih any book. Even Harry Potter had some things try couldnt put in the films. They did a really good job incorperating different ways to explains different aspects only readers through Ceasar. I’m glad they didn’t go the cheesy route & just have Lawerance just deliver a ridiculous amount of monologue. I love the actors as well. After Twilight, I’ve been a little skeptical toward books turned into movies. The actors in twilight didn’t accurate portray the characters and honestly their performances were just lacking all together. I was pleasantly surprised with the actors in this film though. They truly were convincing. I also loved the quality o the film, and how they didn’t bother to put in ridiculous music from the soundtrack like Twilight. It really gave th feel the serious tone it needed. No film will ever live up to Harry Potter, but overallth film had a great vibe to it & I would definitely give it a 4.5.
I feel even more excited about seeing this on Saturday. I fully expected some things to be cut or even outright changed, but it sounds like the film captures the essence and feel of the novel which is ALWAYS more important to me.
I am happy to say my expectations were more than met…
Ben or Vic,
Is there going to be a Hunger Games discussion page? I only ask because I want to ask if there is a specific scene in the movie (we don’t get to see it in the book), but I don’t know if people will think it’s a spoiler . I won’t give away any names, outcomes or anything like that in my question.
DT,
Good idea, we’ll set one up.
Thanks,
Vic
Vic,
Thanks for such a quick response. I’ll wait till then to ask my question.
DT,
Here you go, buddy: http://screenrant.com/hunger-games-spoilers-vic-160855/
Vic
Are there any scenes in the movie that are gory or gross? Is there swearing? These are just some things i want to know. I want to see it, but i have to convince my parents to let me. If someone could answer my questions about the movie (who’s already seen it), i would be very thankful! Thanks!
There’s not much gore and only a couple (minor) swear words. I think it’d be ok for middle school and older or younger kids who have read the books and know what’s happening.
Jenni – I second what Anna said, there’s nothing gratuitous – so as along as you already know what’s going to happen, the film doesn’t revel in the actual on-screen violence.
i think the hunger games should just be a person so i can repeatedly have sex with it cus its so amazing. too far?
More Funny comments & Tweets about Hunger Games at Dacritics
You touched upon all my concerns about this film, Ben. Great review.
I was on the fence on this one but a Ben Kendrick 4 out of 5 is a must see.
Cheers Rob!
Hope you enjoy it. I was between a 3.5 and 4 but the film delivers in a lot of surprising ways – so long as non-Hunger Games fans aren’t expecting an action-packed adventure.
there is a few swear words in the film but nothing too concerning, they covered up most of the gory scenes quite well while still having the shock value of some of the deaths in the arena.
I liked this movie but the cinematography was horrible! The whole movie was closeups and a couple wide shots. The beginning of the movie (the first 30 min) was stupid camera shots of there back and extreme closeups. Not to mention the quick cut fight scenes. The fight scenes I understand but the slow paced talking scenes needed wide shots…. closeups all the time is tedious and annoying. Besides that it was a great movie.
Overall, I am a fan of the series, even if book 3 was daunting. For me, this movie was worse than I expected and not at all worth going to see in IMAX. It definitely helped that I had read the book bc the movie was so empty. The only thing I appreciated in this movie was their attempt at handling the violence, it was tastefully done so if your parents are concerned, there isn’t any blood and guts. Action is limited and if you like close up’s, consider yourself lucky bc majority of this movie is close up shots of people jibber jabbering. If anything, I would go see it during a matinee.
Thank you! Everyone I’ve talked to ignores the extreme amount of closeups. They should of took out some new stuff and helped explain the characters and subplots more.
You took the words right out of my mouth. This is the exact review I would’ve given it.
Cheers Anna! Glad you liked it.
I think the movie could have been better by following the book a little bit more. I mean right after the reaping the baker and Madge is supposed to come in along with her mom, Prim,Gale but they dont. And in the book Katniss and Peeta are all lovey dovey and stuff and it just shows them kissing like 2 times. I loved the movie honestly but I still think it could have been better.
My girlfriend read the book, and was really excited about going to the midnight premiere. We had to walk out. The shaky cam tactic was atrocious. She has a tendency to get extremely nauseous with unbalanced camera work. Honestly, if that was the only way to handle the violence that’s fine, but why put it in on a constant basis throughout the film? I would of preferred them to make this rated R instead of them use that stupid tactic.
The sad part about this is that his movie is guaranteed to be #1 in the box office, and will of course continue with the next two books, while John Carter is also based off a (great) series, and we will probably never see a sequel. Simply, save you money, and if your one of the lucky ones to get The Raid: Redemption in a theater near you, go see that instead.
The hunger games book was fantastic!!i could’nt put the book down! But the movie is a whole different story (no pun in tended) the movie was good but it left out so much things with peeta and katniss,and the whole story that goes along with it.I feel like the movie was missing a lot of specialDetails.In the movie they left out way to many important things.Therefore this movie will NOT be one of my top ten favorites and from a 1-5 i would give it a two
This movie reminds me of “Surviving the Game” and the book “Ender’s Game”. It seems like they mixed the two together with a more modern twist. OVER RATED!!!!
Okay it started with my niece and daughter (Both grown) wanting to go see the midnight showing of this. It grew till we had about 9 family members going to this show including me. I had no clue what the show was about exceot for what I read here at the Rant. I went with an open mind. I found a film that I enjoyed very much. Lots of action and humor and fast paced. Im glad I went to see it but It did not deserve me being at the midnight showing. Going to a mattenee would have been just find. Nice to see a mixed crowd of kids and adults. This show is in no way another Twilight flick (Thank God) However the trailers began and what was first? Yep Twilight. But they made up for it by showing the Spiderman and Avengers trailers. Id say the film was good for kids 8 and up to adult. Enjoyed it but since I got home to bed after 3:oo AM and had to get up at six. Its nap time. Until then. KEEP ON RANTIN!
One final note. Go pee first
Indeed
I agree with much of your review except my grade would be a little lower 3 out of 5. Why?- While I liked Lawrence, the concept and its setup I thought the second half was fairly flat with not enough excitement. I wish the director used the fun of The Running Man and the excitment of Rambo first Blood for this film. If he had, he would have made a great movie. Instead its a good enough one but not one that I need to see again.
It was ok… I think they missed the point about how disgusting the Capitol people are supposed to be, living in outrageous luxury while everyone else is a starving slave. They also forgot to develop Gail’s character and I thought they could have found a much cuter Peta. Katniss should have been played by someone more believable. If you didn’t read the book, you wouldn’t get a lot of the movie. My husband wanted to leave in the middle and I have to say, I’m pretty disappointed.
Oh yeah, what was up with all the close up shots and the jerky camera movements? It almost made you sick but it’s nice to see Katniss has perfect skin…………. I would save your money, it was 2 stars max. I don’t understand anyone who loved it. The book was SO GOOD, what happened to this movie?
I really appreciated this article. i went to the premiere last night and was over all a bit disappointed. I’m a sucker for the details and I feel that they cut out too many important ones to keep the film shorter. I personally think they should have kept the details even if it meant elongating the movie. I agree with all of the points in this article and commend the fair criticisms.
I have read other review articles but this is by far the most unbiasedly accurate one that I have come across. Thank you Screen Rant!
I truly wanted to love this. Was anticipating it for months and loved the book. I was cool with it having a PG-13, but I felt that the whole movie lacked the tension and excitement of its source material. I might have to give it a second viewing to fully wrap my head around it, but I felt that the action/violence was too cut back and that it lacked the detail of why the games were truly deadly and dangerous, and ultimately left me cold.
I agree completely Alex. I really wanted Gary Ross’s interpretation to be its own separate work while at the same time not straying from the main points and deep meaning in the book. as far as the main points go, they hit most of the check points but really i felt no meaning in it and all of the character and deep meaning that we came to love through the books, was lost.