Haven’t Read The Hunger Games Review

            The movie “The Hunger Games” caught my interest because of the hype and vague commercial. It was almost impossible to walk anywhere without seeing some sort of advertisement for the upcoming movie, so I thought it might be worth a try.

It was.

Without the burden of reading the book and comparing mental notes of likenesses, I thoroughly enjoyed this movie. The trend falls along the lines of other great movies such as the “Harry Potter” series, and, I’m told “Twilight” (though I wouldn’t know myself) in that it started off as a book series, received notable recognition, and then turned into a movie that was seemingly geared toward a teen audience.

Anticipating another romantic flic, I was surprised and pleased to see the level of action and logic portrayed by the characters in this movie. I found myself considering how I would survive in a similar situation and then coming to the sad realization that I probably would not have made it out of the gate.

Though the romantic aspect was an excellent touch, the movie was not a commercial teen romance. It was based on survival skills and the importance of hope on people, as well as the best and worst of humanity. As you watch, you feel yourself caring for each character.

Also, the level of detail in this movie is amazing. The costume designs astonished; our potential future, the rooms, buildings, and technology were far past my imagination.

Each death was depicted well, without excess gore, which I found resolved itself with a pleasant change from the new norm. Though the movie resolved itself with multiple predictable conclusions, every other aspect more than made up for this one fault.

This all coming from a new fan to the series, I still believe this will be one of the greatest movie series of our time. Here’s to anxiously awaiting the sequels, starting with “Catching Fire,” coming November 22, 2013.

-Derek Odell

Read The Hunger Games Review

After reading a book you can never detach yourself from, the movie is usually a let-down. The “Hunger Games” movie was that for me. The movie moved so rapidly parts were left out, and the gore was missing; however, if it were to be judged independently from its literary predecessor, it was good. After all, if everything in the book was in the movie it would have been too long, probably close to four hours.

For those who have read the book, the things I noticed were missing include: Madge, Katniss’s only girl friend who gave her the mockingjay pin; Haymitch at the reaping; people from the Capitol who were suppose to be tinted colors, and only their hair was that color; the advanced technology of the Capitol which was not as prominently featured. I am getting nitpicky, but these are the things that made the book so awesome and the filmmakers choice to leave them out left the movie flat compared to the book.

Where was all the gore and the stories of the past Hunger Games? In the book it mentioned past contestants beating someone’s skull in and resorting to cannibalism. None of this was mentioned in the movie. Also, none of the tributes got dirty during the entire Hunger Games. Katniss’s hair remained perfectly braided her and clothes barley torn or damaged after being in the arena for over a week. Perhaps the filmmakers wanted to keep the gore to a minimum to keep the movie rating at pg-13, thus more money at the box office. But they also with out a lot of detail that would have made the movie more realistic.

Watching it as just a movie, not as a reader turned watcher, it was good. I would have loved it if only I had not read the book. I have talked to people who did not read the book and they absolutely loved it, however, on the other hand, I also don’t think they are as deeply impacted by the movie as readers of the book are. A movie can never impact a person as a book can, which is why visual media will never replace books.

-Monique Jensen