The Hunger Games

The Hunger Games (Gary Ross, 2012)
Katniss Everdeen voluntarily takes her younger sister's place in the Hunger Games, a televised fight to the death in which two teenagers from each of the twelve Districts of Panem are chosen at random to compete.

Just before watching this adaptation of Suzanne Collins’ novel I took the time to properly read the source material and have an informed view on Gary Ross’ adaptation of the whole thing. Let’s call a whore a whore and get to the truth that the novel written by Collins is a very good teenage literature that is well conceived and full of parallels with Reality television, the Olympics, propaganda, and all the things that make television one of the most evil inventions of men. However, The Hunger Games isn’t a denunciation of television or the violence that it often depicts. It is about the involvement of teenagers and sometimes child in the ways of bloodthirsty governments in their way to keep the power and its oppression on his people. As subtle as it can be. Or in the case of the Hunger Games as bold as it can be. 

Katniss (Jennifer Lawrence) takes the place of her little sister when the poor girl is picked to participate to the murderous games. Coached by the only winner of her district, Haymitch (Woody Harrelson) and supported by the governor Effie Trinket (Elisabeth Banks) she will be brought along with Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) as the tribute to pay to The Capitol in competing in the Hunger Games. Sadly, as efficient and detailed as the novel was, the movie adaptation skips and jumps in many elements of the story of the original material. Moreover, it is Gary Ross’ inapt directing and uninspired mise en scène that didn’t hold up enough the story and its heart. The deaths of the concurrent are difficult to follow and if I haven’t read the book I’m not sure I would have really understand much of what was happening during many scenes of the film. 

It is a very difficult film to follow because its action isn’t well balanced and the too many cuts of the story make it an almost total mess. The Hunger Games is just an okay adaptation for its readers and it doesn’t is much more. The quality of the film lacks in desire and except the presence of many respected actors it wouldn’t be that worth for the average moviegoer.


  1. The film doesn't really get going until they actually do get to The Hunger Games, but when it does get started up its entertaining, tense, unpredictable, and very well executed from Gary Ross. I also couldn't believe that this was his 3rd film after other flicks such as Seabiscuit and Pleasantville, which are both good but are different from this one. Still though, great jobs from everybody involved and I cannot wait for the sequel. Good review Michael.

    1. Funny cause you seem to have loved this film way much more than I actually did. Good for you. I tend to think that Gary Ross drives his car in the middle of the road and he doesn't take any risks so he has an okay directing but nothing to get me on the edge of my seat.

    2. Fake acting most of the tieme, unconvincing. A premiere in child violence, showing12 yrs old hacked and explicitly stabbed, too much for me. Scary where movies have been going in the past 10 yrs. Story is told miserably. Didn't read the book, but the way is told in the movie it lacks logic. The premis, above all, is unreistic. A eclectism of Gladiator, Karate kid, Truman show with the perpetual sensation from beginning to end that many things are missing. Waste of time.


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...