Monday 26 March 2012

REVIEW: The Hunger Games (12A)

I've never been one to be sucked into cult teen stories. Sure, as a school kid I read Lord of the Rings and the Narnia books but wasn't a big fan of either. Now as an adult I found Harry Potter to be a bit dull (though the movies got better as the series progressed) and Twilight... well I'm male and went through puberty several decades ago so I'm clearly not in the intended demographic!

I'd never heard of The Hunger Games books until publicity for the movie began and, as it's aimed at "young adults" I wasn't totally convinced I should bother but, hey ho, I thought I'd give it a go.


The Hunger Games is set in a dystopian future world where, as an annual television event, the 12 Districts put up one girl and one boy aged between 12 and 18 to compete to the death for the honour of the district. Only one can survive.

Now I'm sure there will be those who wil decry the movie and say it's not as good as the book. I'm not convinced. That, as far as I can see, is adults trying to justify why they're reading books intended for teenagers - the same people for whom Harry Potter was published in an edition with more adult looking covers to spare their blushes on the morning commute.


It's an odd mix of a movie with elements blatantly lifted from The Truman Show, Lost and even Death Race 2000 - and not as good as any of them. It's all very clunky and awkward and, to be honest, would probably have worked better as a mini series.

It's very stylised but all so very, very predictable. Even the twist at the end (Donald Sutherland's intervention) is highly predictable in a way that the twist at the end of The Truman Show was a surprise.

Jennifer Lawrence gives a good performance as Katniss, the female representative for District 12 who volunteers herself in place of her younger sister, but Josh Hutcherson, who plays Peeta, the male representative, has as much life and character as one of those life size cardboard cut outs cinemas often have in their foyer. Most of the time he seems to be reading his lines from the trees where the games are held. (At one point Peeta is experimenting with camouflaging himself as a tree... which says all you need to know about his acting!)

If The Hunger Games are such great books they almost certainly deserve a better movie than this. I suspect fans of the books have over stated their case and it's simply a mediocre story made into a mediocre movie with a big advertising budget.

1 comment:

  1. The film doesn't really get going until they actually do get to The Hunger Games, but when it does get started up its entertaining, tense, unpredictable, and very well executed from Gary Ross. I also couldn’t believe that this was his 3rd film after other flicks such as Seabiscuit and Pleasantville, which are both good but are different from this one. Still though, great jobs from everybody involved and I cannot wait for the sequel. Good review Robert.

    ReplyDelete