|
On April 05 2012 18:52 h41fgod wrote:Show nested quote +On April 04 2012 10:57 khaydarin9 wrote:On April 04 2012 01:49 Kojaimea wrote:On April 03 2012 13:37 khaydarin9 wrote:On April 03 2012 06:13 Kojaimea wrote:
I can make my peace with PG-13 violence. I can make my peace with influence bordering on plagiarism. I can make my peace with filmmakers and authors alike denying any knowledge of said influence.
I cannot make my peace with a boring, boring, BORING(!!!!) movie, that is over 2 hours long. This piece of tripe was physically and mentally draining to sit through. There is no merit from a film-making standpoint, there isn't a singe character i give two shits about, and the action is just dull. Really poor show... This thread is hilarious. My guess is your definition of plagiarism is not the common definition of plagiarism. Well I don't know what you consider the common definition. Here's one that pretty much sums up my impression of it, as someone working the plagiarism minefield that is literary studies. Plagiarism: "the act of plagiarizing; taking someone's words or ideas as if they were your own." -wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn The themes are obviously well traveled (Lord of the Flies, Rollerball, Rollerball Murder, Battle Royale... I could go on) but more importantly plot events of The Hunger Games are dangerously close to those of Battle Royale specifically. Thematic influence is unavoidable. Plot events this similar do justify a closer look. Also, please take note that I said it is "bordering on plagiarism". This is a widely held belief, amongst many people a great deal smarter than I am. I also said that I didn't have an overbearing problem with this. So when Suzanne Collins and the makers of Battle Royale both credit mythology as an influence, the former is plagiarising the latter? All the properties you mentioned above are about survival, but they all treat it differently. There's a huge political element in The Hunger Games that is absent in Battle Royale - doesn't necessarily make it better, or deeper, but it does give a different cast to every action and event. If anything, it's the structure, not the ideas, that is similar between the two, and no one "owns" structure. It also seems somewhat ironic that you used "widely held belief" as a buttress for your statement talking about the themes of the movie. I guess you really did find it mentally taxing. You have to be joking? In Battle Royale, it is a fascist government using the Battle Royale for entertainment and scaring/punishing the population. In The Hunger Games, it is a fascist governement using the Hunger Games for entertainment and scaring/punishing the population. However, this might be not so obvious if you have not read the source material.
Having a fascist government as a feature of the setting doesn't automatically make a story "political". As I recall - and it's been a while - at the end of Battle Royale, the status quo is remains. The fascist government is never addressed or dealt with in the scope of the narrative - it more or less exists independent of the action. You can't separate the fascist government from the action in The Hunger Games - the narrative hangs on the conflict between characters who are driven to sustain it, and characters who are desperate to subvert it. Interestingly, these motivations are a lot more explicit in the film than they are in the book, which is limited to the first person POV.
|
Just got back from seeing this movie.
I was pleasantly surprised. I had never heard of the books until a few months before the movie was announced, which is EXACTLY what happened before Twilight came out. All of a sudden every girl I knew was frothing at the mouth. And a lot of my female friends were talking about Hunger Games as well, so I was a little worried that it was ALSO going to be some sort of vapid teenage chick flick.
But it wasn't bad! I actually really enjoyed it. A lot of the shots of the city and the populace reminded me of The Fifth Element. In that respect it was far more sci-fi than I had expected, which was a welcome surprise. I wouldn't say it was the best movie ever, but I enjoyed it.
Then again, I was drinking soju in the theater as I watched. So... ehh.
|
I was quite disappointed with the movie. I heard from people that the books are better, so I got out Catching Fire and started reading it... To be honest I think it's worse, because I'm up to page 300 or so (out of around 600) and there's still been no action, it's just the main character complaining and going on and on about life after the games and how unhappy she is.
At first I was like, the movie is too ridiculous, because no bad guys are this evil if they want to make the movie believable. What I mean by believable is - you can have a fantasy movie and you'll know if it's a good movie if the plot and characters are 'believable'. But like the people in the capitol were so evil it just makes you think of Sunday morning cartoons. Or that woman who picks the names out of the hat. It was just too cheesy for my liking.
But then it got me thinking - whether the author did it intentionally or not - that this is a lot like how we live our lives in the world today. Almost everyone in the US lives in luxury without giving a second thought to how the products they are consuming came to be. Take chocolate for example - a large proportion of the world's cocoa comes from the Ivory Coast, where child slave labour is used. But how many of us are actually doing something about it? Sure there are charity groups and protest groups, but they make up a small minority.
There is also a scene in catching fire where the main character is disgusted that the citizens of the Capitol throw up their food after eating it so that they can eat more, whilst her friends in District 12 are starving. But isn't this the same as us spending hundreds on alcohol and getting drunk on the weekends then throwing up whilst children in Africa die everyday due to malnutrition?
Do I regret watching it... Hmm, it's two hours I can't take back but that's not really such a big deal. I won't be seeing any future movies though and probably won't finish Catching Fire as it's boring me to tears.
|
On April 14 2012 06:20 Jay Chou wrote:
There is also a scene in catching fire where the main character is disgusted that the citizens of the Capitol throw up their food after eating it so that they can eat more, whilst her friends in District 12 are starving. But isn't this the same as us spending hundreds on alcohol and getting drunk on the weekends then throwing up whilst children in Africa die everyday due to malnutrition?
I felt the second book worse than the first and the third worse than the second. I didn't get bored though. I still couldn't put the books down.
I thought the throwing up was more of a jab at bulimia nervosa and how people here can't even keep their food down.
|
Other than the stupid shaky camera spots and + Show Spoiler +The fact that they left peeta with a leg
|
I cant believe alot of people found the hunger games a good movie. It was an okayish teeny flick at best. No tension, the psychology and the fear of the teenager were captured very bad, it all felt so forced and the random love story in the end was just hilarious. Me and friends burst out in laughter during the scene in the water cave because it was so cheesy.
5/10 maybe
As already said: Watch the real deal Battle Royale.
|
On April 14 2012 22:10 chroniX wrote:
I cant believe alot of people found the hunger games a good movie. It was an okayish teeny flick at best. No tension, the psychology and the fear of the teenager were captured very bad, it all felt so forced and the random love story in the end was just hilarious. Me and friends burst out in laughter during the scene in the water cave because it was so cheesy.
5/10 maybe
As already said: Watch the real deal Battle Royale.
Yeah, because BR is such an amazing display of "psychology and fear" and good acting.
"Oh yes, look at my amazing bulletproof vest!"
|
On April 14 2012 22:22 Shockk wrote:Show nested quote +On April 14 2012 22:10 chroniX wrote:
I cant believe alot of people found the hunger games a good movie. It was an okayish teeny flick at best. No tension, the psychology and the fear of the teenager were captured very bad, it all felt so forced and the random love story in the end was just hilarious. Me and friends burst out in laughter during the scene in the water cave because it was so cheesy.
5/10 maybe
As already said: Watch the real deal Battle Royale. Yeah, because BR is such an amazing display of "psychology and fear" and good acting. "Oh yes, look at my amazing bulletproof vest!"
It is inbetween the action scenes. You see that those kids are actually scared to die. THG feels like they are in a big adventure playground for teenagers and the one who gets caught has to go home early. Not like they have to actually KILL their opponents or die any moment.
|
Just think about the situation that you have to kill your friend, your neighbour or whoever is near you now in order to survive. Think about that fucked up thought. Not in a cool nerdy way in front of your anonyme computer. Think about in in a real honest way and then try to remember if the movie captured the insanity of this situation in an accurate way.
For me the answer is definately: No, not at all!
|
You exhibit the same behaviour a lot of the critics of The Hunger Games in this thread so far have shown. In regard to Battle Royale, you have an open mind and let your fantasy complement things the movie doesn't show or only hints at. You interpret, think, emphasize and thus come to the conclusion that it's a film about psychology, trauma, emotions and whatnot.
Then you watch Hunger Games and throw the same attitude that made BR work for you overboard.
|
The movie was not terrible, but not very good. Pretty boring for the most part, it was made a lot more serious than I expected. Just about all characters had very 'average' sorts of personalities, the obvious 'bad guy' arrogant characters were very unoriginal and uninteresting. Predictable last opponent.
The main merit to it is that a lot of people talk about how much better Battle Royale was, but that actually wasn't very good either; there are far better Japanese and South Korean films with a lot of gore as well as story and actual character development that (unlike BR) doesn't just seem like they're trying to address certain personality issues of some Japanese people for the sake of sucking in more morons who now feel addressed by the brief dialogue each character is given. I remember picking on Gantz for certain reasons and I'm not sure it was actually worse in those ways than BR.
|
I thought this was actually a really good film and it's a mistake to just dismiss it as another teen flick. The film is very different to Battle Royale and they shouldn't be compared. I particularly enjoyed the brilliantly sickening build up to the event and I disagree with the people who have said this was unbelievable (It's not so long ago this really happened after all). I also completely disagree with the comment suggesting there was a lack of dramatic tension. Jennifer Lawrence's performance was excellent.
|
Just saw it today. Was expecting another Twilight-esque movie that has all the teenagers creaming their jeans over, but was surprisingly not half bad. Wouldn't see it again, but was enjoyable.
|
I quite liked this film actually. Good build up and tension, as well as a pretty interesting story (never read battle royale). Thought it did a pretty good job of interrogating human psychology, for those inside the games as well as the spectators. Felt fear, tension, empathy, hate and hope. Saw the savage side of humans in the memebers of the games, a sharp contrast to the coldly logical manipulators in charge.The machinations of the totalitarian government were also uncomfortably realistic. Overall, very enjoyable experience.
View might have been slightly skewed because I havn't been to see a movie for so long, however!
|
Not sure why people are comparing the Battle Royale movie with THG movie. They were made in different time periods by different cultures so obviously THG which is newer will appeal more to NA audiences + better production quality. It`s obvious the underlying theme and plot was more or less copied, but that doesn`t mean THG was better or worse. People should read the BR manga instead of watching the movie to understand why people hold it in such high regard.
|
On April 15 2012 03:27 Xyik wrote:
Not sure why people are comparing the Battle Royale movie with THG movie. They were made in different time periods by different cultures so obviously THG which is newer will appeal more to NA audiences + better production quality. It`s obvious the underlying theme and plot was more or less copied, but that doesn`t mean THG was better or worse. People should read the BR manga instead of watching the movie to understand why people hold it in such high regard.
Apart from the different time frame that these two movies have, the main premise is exactly identical.
BR: Government utilizing this operation as a method to suppress the youth as an oppression, fight to the death, and in the end the main hero and his love interest survives.
THG: 'Capitol' hold a fight to the death tournament for young child across the country, main character have a love interest and oh at the end, both of them end up winning.
Personally, I found myself enjoying both the BR movie and the THG novel. Even taken a much more liking to THG novel but you can't state that those two franchise are not analogous. They practically the same storyline with only a tiny bit of details changed here and there.
|
Hello,
I have not read the books. But tbh, that shouldnt be important if I watch a movie.
The world-setting the story had was quite interesting. Sadly you just got a few glimpse at it, nothing more. I would have liked to see/know more of it...
The characters (apart from the MCs) lacked screentime/introduction. There was only a "randomkid" does X and "randomkid" dies feeling.
The action szenes: Well...I guess hollywood cant show kids killing kids. Also keep in mind the age-rating. Then you will get shaking cameras and a little bit of ketchup.
Story: altogether....well...no suprises or such. Decent/predictable
Storytelling: You could just "feel" the movie was based on a book. Random szenes thrown at the viewer, one after another.
Character development: Plot-love....nothing more.
All in all I cant understand why the movie is hyped so much and why it got such a high imdb rating.
I read and watched BR....I cant compare a book I havnt read with a book I have read, but the movie of BR was just way better.
|
I personally audio booked the series a few weeks before it came out and it did follow the book very well. However if you didn't read them i can see how a lot of the plot wouldn't make a whole lot of sense. I thought it was really good besides some of a crazy camera shots during fights scenes and what not. It was also a little bit slow in the beginning and if your looking for a lot of action and fight scenes this isn't exactly the movie for you.
|
just came back from watching it, and after all this hype I actually expected rich writing but I found it to be below any expectations I had formed.
- Complete lack of character development
- Being very kid-friendly, thus, lacking any violent scenes, the feeling of the desperate situation is less so.
- For most of the film, the only threats are the other kids, and not the environment. Despite the mentor repeatedly saying it, water, for example, was never a problem.
- Major plotholes - ex: how does the dude from District 11 know that the protagonist and Rue were friends? Some stuff seems just too convenient.
|
Major plotholes - ex: how does the dude from District 11 know that the protagonist and Rue were friends? Some stuff seems just too convenient.
Clove boasts about how the careers got Rue and Thresh overhears it as he's sneaking up on Clove. Presumably up until that moment he was going to kill Clove then Katniss (which, incidentally, probably would have made him end up as the winner poor guy).
- For most of the film, the only threats are the other kids, and not the environment. Despite the mentor repeatedly saying it, water, for example, was never a problem.
In the book Katniss nearly dies from dehydration and later on they drain all the water to force the tributes towards the central lake. The movie lacks both those plot points.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
