What did you think?
I, unlike some people, loved the book as a single book, not just as a trilogy. I didn’t think the “conflict felt contrived” at all. I didn’t even notice that Katniss was protected from hard choices! Which she was, that part was obvious once it was pointed out — what if, for example, the original hunger games had come down to Peeta, Katniss, and Rue? Or even Peeta, Katniss, and Thresh? Talk about tough choices then!
But I loved the immediacy of THE HUNGER GAMES and the close focus on Katniss and the world building — what great world building it is, and the way Collins skimped on physical detail didn’t bother me a bit.
So. Loved the book. The movie? I think it was fine if you had already read the book. Otherwise, how could you possibly know what’s going on in Katniss’ head?
When I watch a movie I like, nine times out of ten if there’s a book I’ll want to re-read it after watching the movie. Which I did. So that just confirmed for me HOW MUCH BETTER the book is. Though, don’t get me wrong, I thought the casting was good and the visuals were good. Katniss looked just right. So did Gayle and Peeta. Haymitch was fine. Cinna was all right. Caesar Flickerman was fabulous, just fabulous. FABULOUS.
Even so, even though almost every action was taken directly from the book — except that bit with the berries and the games director right at the end, and actually I wasn’t happy about that change — anyway the movie had a very different feel. A shallow, glossy sort of feel. A casual-adventure-movie sort of feel. A sanitized sort of feel. I think the viewer has to put the depth into the characters and the horror into world, I don’t think the movie on its own did the job.
But it’s not like I can go back in time and watch the movie without having read the book. So how about it? Was the movie great or did it lack the strength of the book?
.
Please Feel Free to Share:
