The Hunger Games

Reviewed by Danny the Demented
Updated 26 March 2012

An entertaining 2hrs at the theater. However, after the film ended, I "hungered" for more details..........which is not exactly a compliment. Oh and by the way, I need better puns. I know.

"The Hunger Games" is the film adaptation of the bestselling novel of the same name. It tells the story of Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence), the protagonist and the heroine of the tale, who lives in a futuristic world where youths are required (2 from each district) to participate in the  "Hunger Game", the annually held fight-to-the-death survival game where 24 will enter but only one will come out alive and be crowned as victor (don't you just love run-on sentences? because I do!). When Katniss Everdeen's younger sister Primrose got selected to be a participant, aka tribute, Katniss volunteered to save her sister. Along with her fellow tribute Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutcherson) from the same district, Katniss must find a way to beat the odds and survive, for both herself and her oppressed district. This is a story of friendship, survival, hope, and ultimately, love. 

Enjoyable, but unavoidably frustrating at the same time, "The Hunger Games" brings with it very well executed production and strong acting, but it also carries a story with obvious holes that I suppose can be filled by reading the novel (maybe a gimmick to sell more books? yes I am paranoid). There were obviously interesting interactions between characters that were mentioned but weren't developed, subplots that ended too soon, and a love story that started hastily and matured before you can blink. This is not an uncommon mistake. Many film adaptations of famous novels suffer from the "We-need-to-cram-as-many-things-in-as-humanly-possible" syndrome. Rather than using the novel only for inspiration and therefore allowing the film to use a little something called "time" to develop, film adaptions tend to want to be true to the books they are originated from and in the process sacrifice the chance to be great. Guys, film makers, producers, hear me: Your movie does not have to be the same as the book, if people want to know what happened in the books, they can READ IT themselves. Movies by nature cannot be too long and therefore it is just illogical for you to "stay true" to the literature. Harry Potter suffered from this, Percy Jackson suffered from this, why hasn't anyone else caught on yet? Am I that brilliant? well maybe I am. All the more reason for you to start PAYING ME HOLLYWOOD!!

Acting was solid in this piece. Woody Harrelson (as Haymitch) was quite simply fabulous. He is one of the few actors that demands your immediate attention whenever he is on screen. You have to watch him whenever he is in sight. Very underrated of an actor, Woody shined in the limited but effective role as the mentor of the tributes.  Jennifer Lawrence was a tremendous lead. What a star she will be. I haven't had the honor to watch her coming out party "Winter's Bone" , but after "The Hunger Games", I am definitely a fan. Very solid job as the strong-minded Katniess, Lawrence also shows the vulnerable side of the heroine with great finesse and poise that is usually seen only in veterans' work. She is one of the three young actresses that I predict to achieve A-list status in the next 5 years. The other two are Emma Stone (she kind of is an A-lister already) and Elle Fanning (don't believe me? watch her in Super 8. She has got grace that cannot be taught).

A pop-corn adaptation that could've been so much more, "The Hunger Games" is still worth the money and does provide a very good time at the cinema. Not satisfied by the film? I guess you better go pick up the book. You do remember books, don't you? You know, pages of paper with words on them? No it's not Kindle, gosh I hate young people.  My name is Danny and I endorse this message.