I caught up to The Hunger Games (2012) last night, courtesy of Netflix. Based on the wildly popular trilogy by Suzanne Collins, it is pretty much what I’d expected. Although I hate the premise -- a society staging an annual tournament wherein 24 youths fight to the death -- I was curious as to what makes it so popular. I suppose readers connect with the heroine, Katniss Everdeen, who is well-played by Jennifer Lawrence. The film runs about 140 minutes, and takes its time getting to the action. I was losing patience, as the society came off as ridiculous. Then again, our world has the Taliban and other Islamofascists, so who are we to talk. Although Katniss is endearing, easy to root for, I was unable to dismiss that she had to kill other youths. Several of them came off as villainous, coldly arrogant, which did not make it any easier for me to accept that they had to be killed. While Katniss was demonstrating her skills with the bow to the organizers and to potential sponsors, I hoped she would launch an arrow into the head of the society’s leader, Donald Sutherland, and the insufferable television host, Stanley Tucci, in the way that Woody Strode threw his spear at the Romans rather than at Kirk Douglas in Spartacus (1960). I suppose that will come about in the second or third installment. Woody Harrelson, who I’ve always found annoying on the big screen, plays a mentor, a past winner of the tournament. The film was directed by Gary Ross, who helmed Pleasantville (1998), which I didn’t like, and Seabisquit (2003), which was good but over-rated. In some of the action scenes he came in tight with a handheld camera. Although I know it was supposed to represent the heroine’s frenzied viewpoint, the shots seemed amateurish. On a scale of five, I rate The Hunger Games two-and-a-half. It’s rated 7.3 at IMDb. I suspect it appeals largely to fans of the books. While watching, I was reminded of at least two other works: Shirley Jackson’s classic short story, The Lottery, and an Arnold Schwarzenegger vehicle, The Running Man (1987). There really aren’t many new stories out there. The old are simply repackaged. The most successful have a freshness about them. The Hunger Games does not achieve that, despite good moments.
It was a slow day at the floating book shop, only one sale. Thanks, madam.
Visit Vic's sites:
Vic's Third Novel (Print or Kindle): http://tinyurl.com/7e9jty3
Vic's Website: http://members.tripod.com/vic_fortezza/Literature/
Vic's Short Story Collection (Print or Kindle): http://www.tiny.cc/Oycgb
Vic's 2nd Novel: http://tinyurl.com/6b86st6
Vic's 1st Novel: http://tiny.cc/94t5h
Vic's Screenplay on Kindle: http://tinyurl.com/cyckn3
No comments:
Post a Comment