The Hunger Games--A Movie Review

Movie: The Hunger Games
Starring: Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, Liam Hemsworth, Lenny Kravitz, Woody Harrelson, Elizabeth Banks, Donald Sutherland, Stanley Tucci, Wes Bentley
Rated: PG-13
My Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars

*************************************

Once upon a time, in the country of Panem, there lived the Capitol and its twelve districts. These twelve districts did not like being subservient to the Capitol so they instigated a rebellion. However, the rebellion failed; the Capitol remained. As punishment, though the Capitol called it "remembrance," once a year, a girl and a boy from each of the twelve districts were called upon to fight in the Hunger Games. Twenty-four young people would fight to the death and only one would come out alive. For that one, the odds were clearly ever in their favor.

It is within this background that Katniss Everdeen (Lawrence) finds herself. It is the day of the Reaping, or rather, the day when the "tributes" are chosen for the Hunger Games. Her best friend, Gale, (Hemsworth) believes that the two of them can escape District 12 and live in the woods forever. Perhaps they could, but Katniss has her mother and her sister, Prim, to think of. She cannot leave them. In the blink of an eye, however, things change. Though Prim's name was chose to represent District 12 in the Hunger Games, Katniss volunteers herself in her sister's place.  Because there has never been such an offering in District 12 before, one of the poorest districts in Panem, there is much excitement. As to the boy who was chosen, it is Peeta Mellark (Hutcherson). Katniss remembers him as the boy with the bread, one who saved her life before. Now, the two must fight each other in the hopes that one of them will return home.

Taken to the Captiol, Katniss and Peeta are trained by Haymitch (Harrelson), District 12's victor from years ago. He is a drunkard and a fool, but he can get the job done. There are Cinna (Kravitz) and Effie (Banks) who turn both Katniss and Peeta into "fashionable people," ones that the crowd might gravitate towards. After all, they can send gifts to the tributes within the games. Katniss and Peeta develop a friendship, of sorts, before the games. But how does that effect things in the arena? And just who will come out alive?

***************************************************************

This is a polarizing topic of conversation. I will confess, I was excited to see the movie as I had read the book and well, friends of mine told me I would like it. The Hunger Games is a tough movie/book to say that one likes. After all, kids killing kids is a tough pill to swallow. We have devalued human life to a sad extent these days. However, I was a person who found a deeper message within the books. I saw parallels to Ancient Rome (I mean, come on, fighting in an arena with people watching? A Capitol that lords its power over its lesser subjects? An evil and sadistic president in Donald Sutherland--one that resembles Nero?) I also saw sacrificial love on the behalf of Katniss, giving up her life for her sister. I'm not saying that is like Christ, but things like sacrifice and honor are things to be valued.

The acting in the film was positively superb. Frankly, I cannot find a weak link anywhere in the casting choices. Jennifer Lawrence did very well conveying the depth and feeling of the strong Katniss. (Please, can the comparisons to Bella and "Twilight" stop?! I haven't read them, but I think Katniss is better heroine from what I have "seen.") Both of the guys, Josh and Liam, played their counterparts as I imagined them. Liam Hemsworth is underused, but then again, his character isn't in Suzanne Collin's book that much. He will in numbers two and three. Every one else, from Elizabeth Banks in ridiculous costumes to Stanley Tucci with blue hair (and scarily reminiscent of Ryan Seacrest), all had a fantastic part to play. The sets were spectacular, the costuming was excellent, and the fact that Suzanne Collins co-wrote the screenplay aided in keeping "The Hunger Games" true to the published book.

So what about the content? Sexual content was a non issue; language consisted of d*** one or two times. If there was anything else, I did not pick up on it. As to the violence, that was where I was concerned. After all, I knew what the book was about!!! I must say, I was "pleasantly" surprised. While there were still the battle scenes, they were more jerky in nature. We didn't focus primarily on the deed; we saw the dead body afterwards. Occasionally, there were blood splatters, but again, we didn't see arrows strike Rue or the mutants kill Cato. Yes, they were there and you heard things, but I would rather hear than I would see violence. It was not treated lightly and yet it was not heavy handed. I would say there was a balance. However, I was surprised at some of the ages present in the audience. Teens, preteens, and adults I get--but why bring youngsters? I guess if they want to deal with the nightmares, that is their problem! The only reason I did not give this 5 stars is because of the violence; it is tough to "love" that.

That is what the Hunger Games boils down to. Personally, I believe that individuals need to decide if these books, and now the movie, are for them. Some people don't want to deal with the powder keg it might set off, just as "Harry Potter" "Twilight" or even "The Chronicles of Narnia". Post apocalyptic, Gladiator-esque novels are tough things to say you enjoy. But I did enjoy "The Hunger Games." I want to go back and see it again....yes, because it was riveting and well acted and fantastic in its own way, but also because I see hidden blog posts lying in its two hours and twenty-two minutes.