Printable Version of Topic

Click here to view this topic in its original format

Magix Club's Forum _ Movies _ The Hunger Games

Posted by: Abby Feb 4 2012, 9:58 PM

So I can't wait for this movie to come out, I love the books and hopefully the movie will stay pretty close to the first book.

Hello, you either have JavaScript turned off or an old version of Adobe's Flash Player. Get the latest Flash player.

Posted by: winxclubrox23 Feb 5 2012, 9:25 AM

I'm very excited for this, yet terrified of what Josh Hutcherson's performance is going to be like. I didn't think he was a very good Peeta choice to begin with, and I haven't really liked him in other movies, but we'll see.

Posted by: P-girl Feb 5 2012, 10:39 AM

So... It's basically 'Battle Royale' U.S. style? Or 'The running man' with teens?

Sorry, haven't read the books, but I couldn't help but see more then a few similarities between these two.

Posted by: Abby Feb 5 2012, 3:03 PM

I hope he does well, I don't really have much of an opinion of him. The last movie I think I saw him in was zathura and he was like 13 or 14 there maybe?

Yeah it's kind of like Battle Royale. It's a post-apocolypic North America where 2 kids between ages of 12-18 (it might start at 13, I can't remember exactly) are picked from a raffle to represent their district so there's a total of 24 'tributes' and they are placed in an arena and the last one alive wins.

Posted by: GuardianOfEarth Feb 5 2012, 3:15 PM

Wee, The Hunger Games :) So excited

Posted by: winxclubrox23 Feb 6 2012, 4:39 AM

Yes, Abby, it's ages 12 - 18.

And, yes, P-Girl, it's similar to Battle Royale, but extremely different in several ways. Suzanne Collins drew her ideas from the Greek myth of Theseus and the Minotaur, as well as stories her father, who was in the military, shared with her. The whole war concept comes into play more in the 3rd book though.

Posted by: Abby Feb 6 2012, 10:56 PM

For some reason, I tend to like the second book the best so I can't wait for that movie to come out. That is, if the first one is any good.

Posted by: Ranma Mar 11 2012, 11:02 AM

P-Girl came to the same conclusion that I came up with. I used to work at a bookstore (It wasn't that long ago that I quit actually...), and the book was insanely popular, but the more people told me about it the more I felt that Suzanne Collins was ripping off Battle Royale.

Posted by: empire_c2 Mar 11 2012, 4:07 PM

I'm looking forward to seeing it. Nervous about the trend in movies butchering books, but I won't know how it will turn out till I see it. Only dumb thing is one time I was watching Entertainment Tonight and they said the series was going to put it into four movies. *shakes head* I wish they would quit doing that for books that don't need it. There is enough content for one book per movie.

Posted by: Abby Mar 11 2012, 10:22 PM

I don't really mind 4 movies if it isn't dragged out. I thought it was necessary for Harry Potter and Twilight in order to stay true to the books. Either do that or have a movie that excludes a lot of details and changes them. Either way though, I don't really mind.

I am so excited for it though, it is what has been getting me through school the past few weeks and will after I go back from spring break.

Posted by: Ranma Mar 11 2012, 11:31 PM

I say they just make the movie obscenely long and give an intermission.

Posted by: Abby Mar 12 2012, 2:48 AM

or make an extended version with all the cut scenes and release it on DVD/Blu-ray later like the Lord of the Rings.

Posted by: winxclubrox23 Mar 14 2012, 2:03 AM

I'd like to see what sort of movie this even is before I can be gung-ho about my opinion on the four. It it sucks, people aren't going to want to watch it.

...then again, the Twilight movies sucked, and still drew in an enormous crowd.

Posted by: P-girl Mar 14 2012, 8:06 AM

And Scott Pilgrim was awesome.
It bombed.

Quality =/= popularity.

Posted by: Ranma Mar 14 2012, 8:50 PM

I was sad that Scott Pilgrim bombed. I love that movie.

Posted by: empire_c2 Mar 15 2012, 2:32 AM

I didn't think it was necessary for Twilight. Harry Potter had a lot of things going on so it was possible, but Breaking Dawn and Hunger Games don't. They could easily have one film per book. It's just a money grab splitting a book into two movies. if they need to, just make it long. Movies nowadays are two hours long so it would not be a big deal.

Posted by: Abby Mar 15 2012, 2:49 AM

I don't see why the Hunger games would be since honestly there is not a ton of content in the third book, but I feel like Breaking dawn needed to be.

Posted by: bloom_daphne Mar 23 2012, 11:44 PM

I attended the midnight première and it was fabulous! You have to see the Hunger Games! :)

Posted by: Abby Mar 24 2012, 3:21 PM

I really wish I could see it tonight! I have to work though so I'm probably going tomorrow night...I don't want to wait any longer though!

Posted by: winxclubrox23 Mar 25 2012, 9:33 PM

I saw it last night — definitely worth watching. Josh Hutcherson was so much better than I ever expected.

Posted by: Abby Mar 27 2012, 1:05 AM

I got to see it Satuday, and I was really pleased with it and some of the changes the movie made to the book. I also liked his performance and all the other characters. Basically, it captured the sense of the book perfectly. I am hopefully seeing it again this coming weekend!

Posted by: musa225 Apr 28 2013, 4:10 AM

Loved the books, didn't think that from a book lovers stand point that the movie did the book justice, but as a movie it was good, ready for catching fire to come out

LOVED the books, the movie didn't do the book justice, ready for catching fire