T O X I C P A S T I C H E
I agree with this:
Pervy Ninja
I understand not putting in the fact that Peeta lost his leg as well as Katniss's going deaf in one ear was a little disheartening. But to say that the movie was a complete waste is a complete exaggeration. You may not understand how budget or time works, but they did so well with what they had. They can't make a three hour movie or anything, and there would be absolute fan rage if the first book was separated into parts. They managed to fit a lot in the movie, and you have to give them a little respect for that. That's a LOT to put in ONE movie. And that alone was two hours and twenty two minutes. It's basically like they cut out quite a few things but still covered so much at the same time.
As for my critique on details, there were things that people raged about that was so unnecessary. For example, how Katniss received the pin. Okay, so she didn't get it from Prim. But it's a ******** movie and that would have taken a whole separate scene as well as other scenes involving the mayor's daughter (haven't read the first book in a bit, I believe it starts with an "m") just to know who she was. The point is that she still GOT it. What would you rage more over? That she didn't even get a pin or that Prim gave it to her (and still covered the "it's for luck" aspect) instead? Common sense is apparently not so common. It's not like they took out the part where she shoots the apple out of the pig; THAT would have been absolutely disastrous and that part is actually crucial whereas receiving a pin is a little more flexible. The fact that they sort of left out Katniss' slight struggle for actual survival was somewhat off, but keep in mind a lot of it is all really Katniss' thoughts and I'd rather her the way she was in the movie than if she were narrating every little thought along the film. Plus, it would take much too long - filmwise - to shoot every moment she goes with thirst and hunger.
Kloob
Honestly, this movie had to be extremely hard to write. Almost 90% of the time of the book it is Katniss is thinking to herself. Nobody wants to hear Jennifer Lawrence talking in her head for almost all of the movie.
And about the kissing.... Keep in mind, Suzanne Collin's form of romance in the books is very dull in the series and just sort of "there", if you know what I mean. They did kiss a lot more in the books, but every time it was just kinda' like: "Oh. Here." every time except for the special one. It has nothing to do with the movie's rating, it's just that the book really emphasized on one in particular. And actually SEEING them kiss all the time unnecessarily just for sponsors might annoy some viewers (particularly the males, I would assume), so the one kiss they did film was the one they wanted to focus on. And I liked it better that way because it made it more special and I'm not ashamed to admit that I was very fond of the kiss they had.
I did not like the cast when I first heard the parts, and I still can think of better people for a few roles. But after a while of waiting for the movie to come out, the idea grew on me a bit and I accepted it. And seeing them on screen; they easily grew on me. It's not about looks, people. Unless, of course, someone was literally born to look one way. But that's tough to come by. So what Gale had shorter hair in the movie? So what Cinna was black? It's the acting that matters. If you're really going to criticize an entire movie based off appearances, you're just arrogant. We are not the author. Everyone has their own interpretation of how characters and settings will look because no author goes into a molecular level of detail to make certain things mandatory when choosing an actor for the role. Be glad that it came to life one way or another. The cast did very well, and at least they tried their best to stick with character likeness, such as Cinna's eyeliner, Effie's crazy looks, the accents of Capitol folk, the dyed hair of Liam Hemsworth and Josh Hutcherson, the braid of Katniss' hair, and much more.
As for camera shooting, I thought it added to the survival aspect. That's what I thought, anyway. It honestly didn't bother me at all. The first half went sort of fast, but still covered everything you basically needed to know. And it was better that way because it was almost an hour in and you still needed to see the arena, which is the longest part, so I'm glad they managed to squeeze everything in.
I could go into more detail of certain parts of the movie that are being too harshly criticized on or that I thought could have been slightly different, but I don't want to make the post longer than I already have.
No book is ever beaten by its movie partner. It's extremely hard. There were things that could have been done differently, but the movie still came out great and I was not pissed off or absolutely devastated or "disappointed". I read all three books, and I'm not complimenting it simply because it was based off the book. I'm complimenting it because I'm glad that it came to life in some way and it all felt so surreal; and the fact that the movie was fairly good also added to my gratitude. The Percy Jackson movie was s**t compared to the book because it had NOTHING from the book. But The Hunger Games film was well worth my ten dollars and I thought it was well done, and covered a lot from the book. Everyone has their own opinion, but to call other people idiots and that you want to hit them because they enjoyed the movie a lot and how they interpreted it is completely immature. If you didn't like it, then too bad. It's made, so deal with it while the rest of us can actually enjoy it for what is was.
I will say, however, that so many people do not seem to understand how hard it is to film a movie like this, let alone decently. I'm proud of the staff behind it. Bravo.
Also, Suzanne Collins wrote the screenplay so if you say anything involving the dialogue or actions, you're probs saying that she is the one who is wrong.
Maybe it will change some people's minds, maybe it won't.
Wow, the quoted seemed to come from a place of rage and was somewhat overbearing. LOL. I can say, I don't agree with the quoted sentiments. Because while I do agree that they followed the events of the book Extremely closely, and I think that's great, I just don't think they executed them well at all. At the same time I am glad that people are enjoying the movie for what it is. I just didn't like it, and honestly, I wish I could have. I also already knew that Collins had a hand in the screenplay, that doesn't mean she has all power over how the film comes together and is projected.
50
150
