Brian's Review - The Hunger Games

This is not the greatest sacrifice in the world. This is just a tribute.

Released: 2012
Genre(s): Action, Adventure, Sci-Fi

Say what you will of today's movie culture, Hollywood is pretty gifted when it comes to harnessing the mass attention of the tween/teen demographic. Look at "The Twilight Saga": the fourth film hasn't even come out yet, but it's already whipping fan girls into some sort of unstoppable, frothing bloodlust. Teenagers love what's hot, and right now "The Hunger Games" is a 3000-degree glass-melting oven. Unfortunately, to hype up the product even more, the transition from page to screen experienced some noticeable watering-down.

That's not to say that "The Hunger Games" is a bad book-to-movie adaptation; in fact, this is one of the best ones I've seen, at least in terms of fan service. Many of the iconic scenes from the original novel make their way into this silver screen interpretation, meaning people who have read the book will be able appreciate the plethora of nods to the source material here. While this focus is one of the film's greatest strengths, it's also a huge drawback.

"The Hunger Games" is almost too much of a tribute (no pun intended) to fans of the book series, making this initially appealing asset a double-edged sword in many ways. I understand why it was necessary to cut out much of Suzanne Collins' original 374-page work, with this bad boy already clocking in at almost two and a half hours, but what was chosen to be removed is what confuses me. While the main body of the story remains intact, many of the more intricate details of the plot are executed, but never explained, leaving anyone who hasn't read the book scratching their heads in blind confusion. While it's not especially detrimental to the onscreen action, the storyline gets a bit muddled at points due to this, losing a massive amount of momentum as a consequence.

Probably the most frustrating example of this is the whitewashing of the characters' personalities, particularly that of protagonist Katniss Everdeen. I, in no way, blame Jennifer Lawrence for the blandness of her character here - she proved herself a more than capable actress in "Winter's Bone" - nor do I criticize Suzanne Collins, whose protagonist in the novel is strong-willed, resourceful, and mature beyond her years. Rather, I point the finger at Hollywood for making her into a somewhat cold, emotionless vehicle for flashy action elements and star power-driven marketing strategies. It's sad to see this happen to a character that stands tall in the world of strong female leads, at least in her literary adventures.

The sense of frantic urgency and hopeless, heavy, dystopian atmosphere the books convey so well are also unfortunately lost in translation. Except for the scenes where horrible stuff is actually getting up in Katniss' shit (i.e. fire, murderous teens from other districts, etc.), you never feel like she's in any real danger. And unlike in the novel, the starving masses of the world are nowhere to be seen; in fact, nobody seems all that hungry - I mean, isn't that why the competition is called The Hunger Games? Good gravy, that should be a no-brainer in terms of details.

Instead, the filmmakers place the main emphasis on the action, and before you start bellyaching, let's clear something up - this is an action flick, and it is based on an action-focused adventure book. Sure, it can get a little angst-ridden, but this isn't a clichéd teen romance, so don't throw a temper tantrum when this movie decides to spend less time spouting sweet nothings and more time wrecking kids in the face. Although I would've preferred a more "Battle Royale"-style film, full of gut-wrenching kills, I understand why the violence from the novel is toned down to meet the target audience's PG-13 rating. The unfortunate consequence of softening these kills is that they become less profound and less shocking than those portrayed in the book. Still, the movie does a pretty damn good job of packing in as much brutal, high-paced action as possible, while maintaining its teen-friendly image.

There's honestly not a whole lot more I can say about this film (sorry for the gigantic-ass review, but thank you for sticking it out until the end). "The Hunger Games" is a pretty decent book-to-movie adaptation (it blows the first "Twilight" crapfest right out of the water), but it's far short of "great." Still, it should be fun for readers of the novels and action fans alike, with plenty of bloodshed and interesting interpersonal relationships to win over new fans as well. I say check it out and get your slaughter on.

Rating (out of 5): 3