Following
the conclusion of the Harry Potter and Twilight book
series, which wrapped-up in 2007 and 2008 respectively, Suzanne
Collins’ The Hunger Games became the next “big thing” for young adult
fiction readers. However, much like the darker themes presented in the
later Harry Potter installments, The Hunger Games explores some
especially heavy material – making it a go-to book series for not just young
adults, but plenty of readers who also enjoy deeper literary offerings. As a
result, it’s no surprise that The Hunger Games film adaptation has,
for some time, been one of the most anticipated movie events of
2012 – setting records for pre-release ticket sales and opening weekend
sold-out shows.
That said,
does writer/director Gary Ross (Sea biscuit and Pleasantville –
not to mention writing credits on Big, Dave, and Mr. Baseball) ultimately
deliver a Hunger Games film adaptation that accurately transports
fan-favorite characters and events onto the big screen – as well as offering up
an entertaining movie experience for audience members who haven’t bothered with
the books?
Despite a
few hiccups that come with distilling a 350 page book (told in first person)
into a two hour and twenty minute film, The Hunger Games is not only
a solid adaptation of the source material – it succeeds at covering a copious
amount of back story, while at the same time delivering some genuinely
entertaining (and at times, thrilling) moments, even for those who are still
unfamiliar with the book series. The Hungers Games books are
jam-packed with supporting characters and in-depth mythos – and so is the film
adaptation (at times to a fault).
The basic
story takes place in a dystopian future where the Capitol rules over the
country of Panem (in what used to be North America )
– and uses “The Hunger Games” to suppress the surrounding districts. Each year,
the Capitol randomly selects one girl and boy from each of the twelve districts
to participate in the Hunger Games – where the 24 “tribute” children fight to
the death until only one remains.
When young
Primrose Everdeen is chosen as tribute at the District 12 “reaping,” her big
sister, Katniss (Jennifer Lawrence), volunteers to fight in her place. Katniss
is joined by fellow District 12 tribute, Peeta (Josh Hutcherson), a strong but
insecure baker’s son, and the two embark on a (one way?) trip to the Capitol to
face off against the other district tributes (as well as one another). However,
with guidance from District 12 resident (and previous Hunger Games winner)
Haymitch Abernathy (Woody Harrelson), stylist Cinna (Lenny Kravitz), and
chaperone Effie Trinket (Elizabeth Banks), Katniss and Peeta quickly
discover that to survive the games they’ll need more than just fast feet and
good aim.
The central
storyline from the books remains intact for the film adaptation, as Katniss
attempts to make sense of her situation – both in terms of attempting to
survive the Hunger Games (inside and outside of the arena), as well as the
difference between illustrious Capitol life and the stark poverty she
experienced back home in District 12. Katniss requires a lot from Lawrence (both physically
and emotionally) and, as usual, the actress delivers a good, nuanced
performance. While the role isn’t likely to get her another “Best Actress”
nomination at the Oscars, she does more with this genre piece than most of her
peers might have attempted (just as she did with Mystique in X-Men: First
Class).
There’s
little doubt that some moviegoers will dismiss The Hunger Games as
the next Twilight saga – in terms of the quality of the acting and
production values. However, as we addressed in our article detailing “5 Facts
About ‘The Hunger Games’ Movie for Those Who Haven’t Read the Books,” Ross
actually lined up a lot of top-tier acting talent (up-and-comers as well as
Hollywood veterans) to ground the horrific events depicted in The Hunger Games with
believable (and meaningful) performances. Hutcherson (as fellow tribute
Peeta) also succeeds in keeping up with Lawrence – presenting one of the more
interesting characters in the film (even with a pink-haired Elizabeth Banks and
drunk Woody Harrelson running around); Hutcherson also delivers during a
pair of especially contemplative moments.
Unfortunately,
even Peeta isn’t safe from the book-to-film adaptation process – as many side
characters are left entirely undeveloped or presented with somewhat muddled
motivations. The scope of the film leaves some character actions and
motivations a bit vague, which will cause non-fans to leave the theater with a
mixed impression of who they are. In the case of Peeta, despite a
full character arc that works on the surface level, his in-arena motivations
aren’t nearly as cohesive (or as interesting) as they are in the source
material. In addition, the “Mockingjay,” which has major thematic importance
(not to mention practical application) in the book series goes almost entirely
undeveloped in the film, and despite a lot of onscreen time that’s spent on the
subject, doesn’t ever come full-circle. These aren’t just “adaptation”
nitpicks, in terms of what is shown on screen – the film leaves plotholes that
could be confusing for general audiences (given the time that was spent setting
them up).
Similarly,
with one or two exceptions, the non-District 12 tributes are mostly just blank
caricatures that leave next-to-no emotional impact as either victims or villains.
Obviously, with 24 tributes, not to mention a number of non-Games side
characters, it would be hard to get to know everyone (a lot of the kids are
throwaways in the book); however, as a film (as opposed to a book – where
Katniss is limited to first person), the experience could have benefited from a
bit more time spent with a few other tributes – so that as they attempt to
slaughter (or help) Katniss, they’d have more impact than just the immediate
onscreen action. It’s a tricky balance, and though the director succeeds
overall, there are times when The Hunger Games seems more
concerned with building up the larger world in preparation for a sequel, than
fully serving some of the moments and characters featured in the current
installment. That said, Ross does succeed in utilizing the film medium for
the better, such as when he makes up for the lack of Katniss’ internal thoughts
by smartly implementing external sources for much needed exposition (via the
game announcers and production team).
It needs to
be said that some moviegoers – those expecting an epic action
movie experience – may also find that the film drags (especially in Act
2), given the lengthy run time. Anyone interested in the series mythos will be
sated by seeing book characters re-imagined on the big screen, but prior to the
actual Hunger Games, there are very few (read: zero) large-scale action
pieces to break up all the world-building and exposition. Patient moviegoers
will enjoy plenty of intriguing character drama, but there’s no doubt that the
film (like the books) relies heavily on the back end to hit its action quota.
Ultimately, action fans may still be underwhelmed by the
actual Games themselves.
Quick,
frantic cuts probably helped the film maintain a PG-13 rating, given all the
teenagers that die on camera, but as a result, the film is short on captivating
battle choreography or epic one-on-one confrontations. Instead of large-scale
action set pieces, The Hunger Games movie presents a story about
Katniss surviving (and often hiding) – not outright hunting down her fellow
tributes – and because of that, the Games portion (despite loads of tense
moments) could prove to be underwhelming. In the end, the film is better off
for the restraint that Ross employs – since it keeps the focus on Katniss and
her plight (not over-the-top CGI
explosions) – but it will limit the entertainment value of the onscreen action
for some moviegoers.
As the
first installment in what will be a four-part film series (based on a
three-part book series), Ross has done a solid job establishing the series’
major players, as well as the ins and outs of Panem society. Ultimately the
director crams a lot of quality content into the film’s two-hour
twenty-minute runtime – though some plot threads, scenes, and characters
are underserved by the movie’s conclusion. While The Hunger Games is not a
non-stop fight-to-the-death action film, it succeeds at being something even
more interesting – a fascinating and disturbing (not to mention tense)
character drama that successfully captures the core themes of the book.
If you’re
still on the fence about The Hunger Games, check out the trailer below:
No comments:
Post a Comment