There is a new series afoot in theaters. “The Hunger Games” is the first of what will likely be three films, or perhaps, four films if it is decided to break the last book into two films, which is the current trend. “The Hunger Games” concerns a young woman named Katniss Everdeen, played by the very good Jennifer Lawrence, who was also very good in “Winter’s Bone.” Katniss lives in a future society in which at some point there was civil unrest and an uprising of citizenry occurred. Either I was not paying close enough attention or it is never fully explained why said civil unrest and uprising occurs. One can always point to the government being selfish, soul-sucking assholes, but that is too superficial,and, again, I do not know if that is the reason anyway. Perhaps the books, written by Suzanne Collins, explain the back story in greater depth.
As a viewer of the film, though, I would have liked to have known a bit more about how things got how they are in the future society used as the setting for this story. Proper usage of back story in a film, or series of films, provides more depth and richness. This, in turn, allows the viewer or reader to become more invested in the story. The back story, of course, does not have to all be given at the beginning of the film. Many times back story is told throughout the course of the film. Whatever the case may be, back story is a nice thing to have and “The Hunger Games” felt devoid of this important element.
As for the rest of the film, it left me emotionally inert. It is not a bad film. It is not at all a great film. It is an ok film. There are several cool set designs and costumes to look at which are visually appealing. Many of the elements of “The Hunger Games” do seem borrowed from other films, predominantly “The Running Man” and Terry Gilliam’s “Brazil.” The notion of televising a battle to the death is directly from the Arnold Schwarznegger film, which was based on a Stephen King book. Other films of which I was reminded while watching “The Hunger Games” were “Gattaca,” and “Logan’s Run.” I know it is more and more difficult to come up with original ideas these days, so I was not as bothered by these similarities as I once would have been.
The film never captured my interest. I could not get interested in the plight of the two leads, Lawrence and Josh Hutcherson as Katniss’ fellow combatant, Peeta Mellark. The two actors’ performances are very good. Their performances did not lessen my interest in the film. The story in the film is too juvenile for my tastes. I do not understand why a government would choose as punishment on a society for rebellion and causing all hell to break loose, a battle to the death between 10-18 year old kids. That seems like a very lame punishment. Seriously, inhumane as it is, it just seems like a silly punishment. Of course, this is why the books are geared towards young adults, I suppose. That age group in peril makes for solid sales. An awful lot of time is spent in a dark forest as well in the middle of the film. Things of consequence happen, however, these scenes felt just as boring as many of the scenes in “Avatar” did. Of course, in “Avatar,” there were a lot of cool 3-D effects to distract me from the dull story.
Philosopher, Immanuel Kant, would have said that it is against my will to have enjoyed “The Hunger Games.” It is difficult to resist Kant . A good will is one which is influenced by moral demands. Such reasoning implies that one’s nature is to be attracted to that which is not moral. Can morality be dictated in one’s mind, or is it particularly innate in all of us? That is a question not answered in “The Hunger Games, “ however, it is a question all the same, a question to which many answers can be given. Kant states that the only thing which is good is a good will. Decisions that one makes in life should be guided by their inner morality or goodness. Am I, then, not good for not enjoying “The Hunger Games” to fullest and greatest capacity as not only a film lover, but also as a human being, representative not only of the planet Earth, but also the Delta Quadrant? How shall I continue to represent such an august group of people when pressed with such matters and a desire to compliment my life and my actions with good? Is nature, indeed, a series of events that will occur independently of our action or inaction upon it? What does the number 26 really mean? If the universe is infinite, why do we assign numbers to anything? Since we are assigning numbers to things, I will give “The Hunger Games” 2.68 out of 5. Had the performances of the leads not been as good as they were, the number I have assigned to the film would be less by approximately 18.91 percent.
I know that I am probably in the minority as many people seem to have enjoyed “The Hunger Games” more than I did. Again, it is not a terrible movie. It is ok, but not terribly memorable. I think a yummy batch of chocolate chip cookies is now in order, so I will go prepare some for consumption.
The reason for the uprising does not need to be explained, it is implied. A government that would force young people to kill one another is clearly tyrannical. The uprising was surely an attempt to take power back from a tyrannical government, and they quashed the uprising, then forced each district to give up a young person as a "sacrifice" (though they call them 'tributes') as retribution for their insurrection and a reminder that the government is in control.
ReplyDeleteThe citizenry is forced to watch, but is likely partly responsible for the fact that it has become a spectacle (like the Olympics or Super Bowl). I can see something that is meant to be a sort of torture at first, turning into a competition that people get behind (like in gladiator days).
When we join the movie, they are in the 74th year of the games, I think it says. So one can assume that the population is somewhat zombiefied and compliant under iron rule. Note how in the beginning characters are afraid to speak their minds even though no one else is around to hear them.
Many things are implied instead of overtly explained, which I appreciated about the film.
I have not read the books, but didn't feel in the dark at all.
Historically, there are many examples of citizenry cheering wildly for government constructs because they are required to do so. See just about any documentary on North Korea right now and you'll see the same thing -- pageantry and offerings made to the government with broad smiles on their faces, because doing anything otherwise results in terrible consequences.
BBC did a doc about North Korean actors, and the only things they create are odes to the "Dear Leader" and the government. They smile and talk about what a privilege it is. There was one moment when fear flickered across one of the young men's faces for just a brief moment, and I wondered what might become of him that he dropped the facade for a moment on camera.
I think we are to glean and assume that the people of the 12 districts in Hunger Games live under similar constraints.
And I'm sure the remaining sequels will play out with a growing insurrection led by "the girl on fire."
We need a hero. I dig it.