Gary Ross's The Hunger Games is a film of enormous potential that settles for being a little better than it needs to be. Compared with the cinematic incompetence of the other young adult lit-inspired franchises that have dominated the multiplexes, this film is practically Blade Runner. But held against the enormous potential of its source material it's hard not to feel deflated by the final product.
"Don't color too far outside the lines" was clearly the order of the day in the adapting of Suzanne Collins' literary phenomenon. As a result, Hunger Games suffers from a milder case of the Xerox and cram method of adaptation that plagued the Potter franchise. The result is a perfectly competent movie, but material this rich deserves a filmmaker who will make a grab for greatness, even if that risks alienating some potential ticket buyers.
(minor spoilers)
The set up is irresistibly compelling. In a dystopian future the country of Panem now covers most of North America (no word what the rest of the world is up to) The powerful Capitol holds the annual Hunger Games in which twenty-four children age 12-18 battle to the death. It's meant as both a show of power and as Roman spectacle meant to placate the masses. When 12-year old Primrose Everdeen is drafted into competition tough and resourceful Katniss volunteers to take her sister's place in order to spare her certain death in the arena.
The scenes involving Katniss's arrival in the Capitol and the lead up to the games are easily the film's best. Hunger Games has fun with the decadence of Capitol city and its idle rich residents who dress like characters from Amadeus crossed with Ziggy Stardust. Upon arrival in the Capitol the dirt-poor contestants (or "tributes") are scrubbed and done up like Dororthy and friends inside the gates of Oz.
From there it's on to more good material involving the tributes meeting with former Hunger Games champions to learn strategy. The taciturn Katniss is smart and capable but has a blind spot when it comes to winning friends and playing to the crowds - a valuable skill considering Capitol citizens are permitted to intercede with help on behalf of their favorite contestants. It is strongly suggested that a romance between her and Peeta, her fellow 12th district tribute, would go a long way in that regard, although the degree to which their feelings for each other are fabricated is one of the many tantalizing subplots the film never fully explores.
I should confess that I have not read The Hunger Games. As I stated earlier I prefer to experience the movie without any preconceptions intruding on the experience. But when I finally do sit down to read it I will be surprised if the novel lets Katniss Everdeen off the hook as easily as the movie does. How can I say that considering she's a sixteen-year old girl forced by a fascist government to fight in gladiatorial combat not only against other teens, but against starvation, genetically engineered killer animals, and referees who change the rules on a whim? Because despite being in a situation where she has to kill in order to survive the screenwriters conspire to spare Katniss any of the painful moral choices inherent in the premise.
I disengage emotionally when I realizes events are unfolding, not according to implacable logic, but in order that the heroine remain likable and nothing too upsetting threaten the film's four quadrant demographic appeal. Why else do we need good and bad players when the game itself is so undeniably evil? Because having "bad" tributes allows Katniss to maintain her virtue throughout by only using violence in wholly justifiable self-defense. Even the director's use of Bourne-style shaky cam seems less a stylistic choice and more a decision dictated by the need to preserve a PG-13 rating by blurring the action at moments of horrific violence. Not that I desired long lingering closeups on the child on child bloodshed, but if you introduce subject matter this unsettling, no fair pulling some slight of hand to avoid dealing with the implications.
So once one abandons hopes for Hunger Games to be some kind of Kubrickian, Clockwork Orange-level social commentary and accepts it for the somewhat thoughtful, middle-of-the-road action film it is, what then? By that standard it is pretty solid movie with more on its mind than 95% of blockbusters. Hunger Games is never boring with some decent action and strong characters. It does contain at least one instance of glaringly poor CGI and an inexcusable appearance of the "Talking Killer" trope.
I would call this Jennifer Lawrence's engaging performance as Katniss a star-maker but anyone who has been paying attention knew she was A-list material when Winter's Bone was released two years ago. She has the market cornered on young female characters that exude strength and maturity beyond their years. Stanley Tucci and Elizabeth Banks provide able scene-stealing support as the hideous Hunger Game officials done up like nightmarish harlequin clowns, grinning and backslapping and lending chipper support to the children they are shepherding to their slaughter. Tucci in particular, as the commentator of the Games, gets a lot of mileage out of his expressions of faux-concern and series of Cheshire Cat grins.
I should confess that I have not read The Hunger Games. As I stated earlier I prefer to experience the movie without any preconceptions intruding on the experience. But when I finally do sit down to read it I will be surprised if the novel lets Katniss Everdeen off the hook as easily as the movie does. How can I say that considering she's a sixteen-year old girl forced by a fascist government to fight in gladiatorial combat not only against other teens, but against starvation, genetically engineered killer animals, and referees who change the rules on a whim? Because despite being in a situation where she has to kill in order to survive the screenwriters conspire to spare Katniss any of the painful moral choices inherent in the premise.
At one point she makes a friend with one of the younger, weaker players. How does Katniss feel about the fact that she is going to be forced to murder her if she wants to live? We intuitively sense that she is not capable of such a thing, but what then of her promise to return home to her sister alive? The lead characters address it vaguely at one point, saying they suppose they'll kill when the time comes, they guess. Yet when the games begin Katniss's strategy is apparently to climb up a tree and stay there, hoping, I can only assume, that all her competitors kill each other off or die of natural causes.
I disengage emotionally when I realizes events are unfolding, not according to implacable logic, but in order that the heroine remain likable and nothing too upsetting threaten the film's four quadrant demographic appeal. Why else do we need good and bad players when the game itself is so undeniably evil? Because having "bad" tributes allows Katniss to maintain her virtue throughout by only using violence in wholly justifiable self-defense. Even the director's use of Bourne-style shaky cam seems less a stylistic choice and more a decision dictated by the need to preserve a PG-13 rating by blurring the action at moments of horrific violence. Not that I desired long lingering closeups on the child on child bloodshed, but if you introduce subject matter this unsettling, no fair pulling some slight of hand to avoid dealing with the implications.
So once one abandons hopes for Hunger Games to be some kind of Kubrickian, Clockwork Orange-level social commentary and accepts it for the somewhat thoughtful, middle-of-the-road action film it is, what then? By that standard it is pretty solid movie with more on its mind than 95% of blockbusters. Hunger Games is never boring with some decent action and strong characters. It does contain at least one instance of glaringly poor CGI and an inexcusable appearance of the "Talking Killer" trope.
Verdict: As it stands, Hunger Games is a film well worth two hours of your time, but there was a better, tougher Hunger Games to be made from this material. One where a really ruthless adaptation didn't sand down the sharp edges or backpedal away from the questions raised by the premise. Some may claim that the sequels will provide the depth and complexity I'm looking for, but there was no reason this first installment could not have been that movie. 6 out of 10
Take away the hullabaloo surrounding the film adaptation of Suzanne Collins’ best-selling young adult book and what you have is an absorbing film with a dire premise that stands pretty much on its own. Lawrence is also the stand-out here as Katniss and makes her seem like a real person rather than just another book character brought to life on film. Good review Michael. Check out my review when you can.
ReplyDeleteMy biggest problem with the movie was the lack of character development, i just didn't care about anybody.
ReplyDeleteI don't understand what all the fuss with "Hunger Games" is about. Nothing memorable about the film.
I thought it was amazing, I might not have liked it as much if I hadn't read the book though... plus everyone should keep in mind that there are at least two more films to come... there is more... there are issues they didn't talk about as much because they are saving them for later.
ReplyDelete