The Hunger Games

Visually and conceptually repulsive. It's true that after the first half, where farcical fascist harlequins prepare the plebeians for bread and circuses, things improve slightly. However, I still don't understand why Jennifer Lawrence in the second part doesn't have a bump on her forehead, isn't gnawing on rattlesnakes' rattles, or riding a motorcycle among doves. And does she love the young baker or the young Thor? One would hope to accept this factory of sterility, clichés, and silly plot twists as a guilty pleasure, but even that seems unlikely. A telling moment is when the youth head to the "arena," and instead of appearing pale and vomiting or urinating as if landing on Normandy, they act as if they're about to embark on a pioneer camp obstacle course. I kept hoping for Professor Subzero to come in with his goalie stick and smash them like Ron Hextall during moments of mental distress. (13/06/2024)

A roller coaster of a plot, which greatly enhances your desire to read a book, but also works as a surprising teenage hit right to the very last minute. The characters are spot-on, the actors amazing, the relationships believable, and despite several seemingly exaggerated scenes towards the end, it's actually hard for me to find any specific criticism. Perhaps if the second installment goes deeper into the interaction between the main characters, I will be fully thrilled. Those who mock the partial resemblance to the works of George Orwell or The Truman Show have failed to grasp that there is a slightly different metaphor here. Katniss Everdeen for the win. P.S.: I fell in love with the book almost instantly, and after reading the entire saga, I would give Suzanne Collins almost anything. Just for the record. (08/04/2012)

The only thing worth anything in this film, its theme, has already been filmed in an original, energetic way as a provocative satire in Battle Royale. The American version, striving to be a serious and riveting thriller with a romantic storyline, is indigestibly lengthy, clichéd and uses makeup and costumes like from "2001: A Space Travesty 2" with Adam Sandler. I’m giving it the second star for the pleasantly sober acting of the two main characters, who are the only elements of the film that don’t seem like a bad joke. (23/03/2012)

I didn't expect anything at all, and yet the film surprised me quite a bit. Anyone who starts talking about artificial romance completely missed the point and reading their reviews is a waste of time because they won't be objective. Hunger Games is a game, or rather a romance only on the surface, just like society today (or most of it), which this film criticises in a rather sophisticated way. It starts with the same system as the Hunger Games (a tribute to wars), through pathetic wishes for happiness, appalling (intentionally, for God's sake!) costumes, so criticising the film for that is probably the same as being upset that you're not hungry anymore after eating. As far as philosophy is concerned, I don't really have anything to criticise. Technically, the film is quite decent (the visuals of the city, the sets, etc.). The only slight issue arises during the actual game. Some things seemed a bit half-hearted and sometimes the viewer gets lost in what is meant to be taken seriously and what is just a wink. I won't dwell on the handheld camera, nor the quite inconsistent action scenes (sometimes naturalistic, other times "veiled"). Gary Ross seems be a much more captivating storyteller and philosopher than a technician and director of action scenes. I mustn't forget Jennifer Lawrence, who shines as the modern-day heroine and will one day replace Kate Beckinsale, Milla Jovovich, and other tough chicks, and she to be a much better actress too. Hunger Games is definitely not for classics and narrow minds. I don't quite understand the huge profits because I expected most people would not appreciate the content (which I assume has happened), but apparently, that doesn't prevent it from being a film experience, although perhaps a slightly different one. (02/04/2012)

Twilight for fifteen year-old intellectuals, and I don’t mean it as bad as it may sound. Hunger Games is for the same age group as that other rubbish, but at least it tries (and in the book maybe successfully, I don’t know, can’t judge, didn’t read it) to deliver some social criticism, it’s also about a lot more than whether some unstable idiot will take a vampire or a werewolf as her lover, and the motivations of the protagonists are much deeper. As an undemanding blockbuster, it’s pretty good, it looks quite nice (given the low budget), and the art design of the Capitol and its inhabitants was captivating. The most interesting themes, though, are only sketched out, but maybe the upcoming sequels will manage to complete them, I’m curious. What bothered me the most was the unrealistic behaviour of the characters in the Arena and the fact that I didn’t understand at all how the institution of the Hunger Games is supposed to help the Capitol rule the other regions. The film is not great by any means, but it was decent fun. Jennifer Lawrence is brilliant. 7/10 (28/03/2012)