Page 2 of 2

Re: Hunger Games!

PostPosted: Tue Nov 26, 2013 10:36 pm
by Ribbons
I don't know if anybody else has seen Catching Fire, but it's actually kind of great. If they keep the same writing and directing staff in place, the final two movies are going to kick ass.

Re: Hunger Games!

PostPosted: Sat Nov 30, 2013 12:44 pm
by Peven
cool, I was tentatively planning on seeing it in the theatre, now I will make a point to do so

Re: Hunger Games!

PostPosted: Wed Jul 09, 2014 3:54 pm
by Ribbons
I'm enjoying the marketing for the final Hunger Games film, Mockingjay, thus far. Here are the first two teasers:





And click on the picture below for the district propaganda posters:

Image

Re: Hunger Games!

PostPosted: Mon Sep 15, 2014 5:06 pm
by Ribbons

Re: Hunger Games!

PostPosted: Tue Sep 16, 2014 12:41 pm
by so sorry
Ribbons wrote:



Bow and arrow technology in this dystopian future is kick ass. Will the rebels reveal their secret weapon, the slingshot in this movie or the next?

Re: Hunger Games!

PostPosted: Tue Sep 16, 2014 1:42 pm
by Ribbons
lol yeah. I tend to roll my eyes at stories like this that try to legitimize bows and arrows in modern combat by tricking them out. But I think it looks good otherwise.

Re: Hunger Games!

PostPosted: Wed Jul 29, 2015 11:28 pm
by Fried Gold
I watched the first movie tonight.

I'm not quite sure if I was watching a different film to everyone else, but it seemed very average to me. There seemed fairly little grip on any character's motivations, with the main character herself seemingly making no progress during the story, and everyone stands around looking concerned at TV screens.

We ended up picking apart the plot while we watched as it was more interesting than the plot itself. Some points are mentioned, used and set up early on then forgotten about part way through. Stuff happens and characters do things for no particularly good reason.

Woody Harrelson and Elizabeth Banks are quite good though. The guy playing Peter appeared to be a graduate of the Joey Tribbiani School of Acting.

Are the rest of them better or different? Because, based on this one, I've no desire to watch them.

Re: Hunger Games!

PostPosted: Thu Jul 30, 2015 9:06 am
by so sorry
Fried Gold wrote:The guy playing Peter appeared to be a graduate of the Joey Tribbiani School of Acting.
.



Image


I only saw one of them too (the middle one, in the jungle or some shit?), and literally groaned and laughed in the theater (my wife read the books). It was ridiculous for me, and I didn't think watching the other ones would change my opinion.

Re: Hunger Games!

PostPosted: Thu Jul 30, 2015 9:50 am
by TheBaxter
i saw the first one and thought it was the most generic YA hero-journey action film. every character and plot element felt like it was pulled form earlier, better books/stories. i still do want to see the other films though, because it looks like after the first one things go in a more interesting, political direction. and jennifer lawrences is very.... watchable.

Re: Hunger Games!

PostPosted: Thu Jul 30, 2015 8:52 pm
by Ribbons
You should stick with the movies, they get better as the series goes on.

I like The Hunger Games. It's definitely a YA series with a bunch of YA tropes, but it's also got a lot on its mind. It's the pale imitations of The Hunger Games like Divergent and (especially) The Maze Runner that are wastes of time. Plus, the ending is fucked-up in pretty much every way imaginable, which I appreciate.

Re: Hunger Games!

PostPosted: Fri Jul 31, 2015 8:44 am
by Spandau Belly
I saw the first one when it came out and I remember generally respecting it.

It did a good job maintaining its moral centre. One of the major pitfalls it dodged was falling into making the big deathmatch into a fun action sequence with slick choreographed fights. They were able to keep the feeling that this is all horrible and scary and that the kids don't like being part of it. I'm sure somebody like Neil Blomkamp would spend the whole movie telling us this is all so very wrong, but then couldn't resist making the big deathmatch look like the funnest most glorious thing ever.

I also thought they did a good job of crafting a female hero without resorting to making every male character some sort of condescending rapey chauvinist. The movie seemed to be set in a world that was pretty gender equal and not dwell on it.

There was some dumb stuff. I remember Wes Bentley having a computer that could generate real monsters which he would unleash into the games, and that was really dumb. But for the most part I found it pretty good. It was able to examine its social issues in a way that wasn't overly simplistic and still keep the focus on the plot and characters.

The HUNGER GAMES films are produced by Lionsgate, who are sort of the modern day Golan Globus. Any movie they produce is usually done for about 30% less budget than a comparable project at Fox or Warner Bros, and it shows. The production value was generally quite cheap. The costumes and sets all kinda look those old LOGAN'S RUN era sci-fi movies. This series exploded and became their biggest cash cow and I think they invested a bit more in the sequels, but still cut corners to keep cost low.

The second one just looked like a rehash of the first one with a bigger badder deathmatch. The third one looked like it got into some interesting stuff about how counterculture movements employ the same cynical marketing tactics as the regimes they supposedly oppose. But they did that stupid thing where they bloated one movie out and split it into two and I hate that. So I probably won't see the sequels.

Re: Hunger Games!

PostPosted: Fri Aug 07, 2015 1:30 pm
by Fried Gold
I watched the second one. It's better, but was essentially just a remake of the first story.

Does Toby Jones' character end up being more pivotal? Otherwise, why did they cast Toby Jones for a role which is onscreen for 20 seconds in each movie?

Re: Hunger Games!

PostPosted: Fri Aug 07, 2015 4:48 pm
by Ribbons
Honestly I don't know. He's not in the third movie at all, and I doubt he'll be in the last one. Maybe he needed the cash to renovate his kitchen.

The second movie/book is a retread of the first, but the third is completely different.

Re: Hunger Games!

PostPosted: Mon Aug 10, 2015 3:11 pm
by Ribbons

Re: Hunger Games!

PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2016 11:44 am
by Fried Gold
Did fans of these movies like Mockingjay?

Because having reached the end of Mockingjay Part 2, I felt like it was a huge waste of five hours.

Re: Hunger Games!

PostPosted: Wed Mar 30, 2016 6:26 pm
by Ribbons
You mean because you didn't like them, or because you feel like nothing was really accomplished? Or both?

Re: Hunger Games!

PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2016 10:41 am
by Fried Gold
Ribbons wrote:You mean because you didn't like them, or because you feel like nothing was really accomplished? Or both?

A bit of both.

It was almost totally unnecessary to split Mockingjay into two parts, as far as I can tell, which doesn't help matters. Part 2 has no rhythm, no tension and no macguffin. It doesn't build toward anything.

Re: Hunger Games!

PostPosted: Thu Mar 31, 2016 11:56 am
by Ribbons
The last book is my favorite in the series because I admire how ballsy the ending is, but I think the adaptation dropped the ball a little bit.

I agree that the story over both movies was way too long. Mockingjay is actually the shortest book in the series, so it didn't make much sense to split it in two. On the other hand I liked that we got more time with a couple characters who up to that point had largely been ignored (Liam Hemsworth, Katniss's sister Primrose) because of what happens to them at the end.

Re: Hunger Games!

PostPosted: Fri Apr 01, 2016 10:49 am
by Fried Gold
Ribbons wrote:The last book is my favorite in the series because I admire how ballsy the ending is, but I think the adaptation dropped the ball a little bit.

I agree that the story over both movies was way too long. Mockingjay is actually the shortest book in the series, so it didn't make much sense to split it in two. On the other hand I liked that we got more time with a couple characters who up to that point had largely been ignored (Liam Hemsworth, Katniss's sister Primrose) because of what happens to them at the end.

Is Prim in Part 2 that much? I remember her appearing at the beginning when they're testing Peeta's conditioning. And then she obviously pops up again toward the end.

And the same goes for Thor's brother to a certain extent.

...I think my issue is still largely with them splitting it into two parts for no reason.

Re: Hunger Games!

PostPosted: Fri Apr 01, 2016 3:37 pm
by Ribbons
Fried Gold wrote:Is Prim in Part 2 that much? I remember her appearing at the beginning when they're testing Peeta's conditioning. And then she obviously pops up again toward the end.


***SPOILERS***

Yeah, not so much in Part 2. My other issue with that is that her death seems rushed and confusing. Because I read the book I knew that she was part of a team of rebel medics that helped the wounded in the Capitol, but I don't think that was ever really explained in the film. She just kind of pops up for half a second before getting blown to smithereens, and that's arguably the most important moment in the entire series (this whole story began, after all, because Katniss didn't want her sister to die). For a two-part installment that's unconscionably long as it is, there was no reason that they couldn't have spent more time on that.

Re: Hunger Games!

PostPosted: Fri Apr 01, 2016 5:59 pm
by Fried Gold
Ribbons wrote:
Fried Gold wrote:Is Prim in Part 2 that much? I remember her appearing at the beginning when they're testing Peeta's conditioning. And then she obviously pops up again toward the end.


***SPOILERS***

Yeah, not so much in Part 2. My other issue with that is that her death seems rushed and confusing. Because I read the book I knew that she was part of a team of rebel medics that helped the wounded in the Capitol, but I don't think that was ever really explained in the film. She just kind of pops up for half a second before getting blown to smithereens, and that's arguably the most important moment in the entire series (this whole story began, after all, because Katniss didn't want her sister to die). For a two-part installment that's unconscionably long as it is, there was no reason that they couldn't have spent more time on that.

Indeed. I was reminded that there's a brief scene in Part 1 where she's training to become a nurse. Although, it still didn't really explain why she was there all of a sudden.

I thought they could have skipped a lot of the journey into the Capitol and not bothered with the extended sewer tunnel zombie sequence. It might've left more time for character moments. There is a lot of padding.

As you say, what seems like a potentially vital moment with Prim is done and dusted without much significance.