I haven't seen the movies, but I read all three books. For a long time I was turned off by the absurd premise, but when I set that aside and read the first book I thought it was pretty good. I didn't like the second book very much, not a lot happened, the story and characters weren't developed enough in the second book to make it seen necessary or enjoyable. The third book is my favorite, shit goes crazy. Good endings are difficult, and I was impressed with the ending of the hunger games trilogy.
I've read all three books and I'd say that unfortunately, they're shit. Suzanne Collins does a good job of creating an interesting (if not wholly unbelievable) world, a few intriguing characters, and destroys it by forcing us to experience all that through the eyes of one of the most vapid and plodding characters I've ever read. Katniss has a complete detachment from the world that is meant to show us how shocking the Capital is and the games eventually are, but really just made me feel like I was in the head of a psychopath. A really, really boring psychopath.
The movies are better because we're at least not constantly bombarded with Katniss' droning nonsense, and just have to look at her blank expression as more interesting stuff is happening around her.
I've read the first two books and seen both movies, and I liked 'em. The books were quick, popcorn reads and I don't remember the protagonist being overly piney (though I may have forgotten.) I thought the movies were fun and never really dragged. Nothing spectacular, but none of them insulted their audience.
They have an interesting premise that falls short of reaching it's potential in favor of trite teen romance.
EDIT: Although I fully understand that the teen romance angle was very intentional as that sort of thing sells really well these days. Ever since Harry Potter authors have been trying to capture that same money-wave and surf it all the way to the bank. With the overwhelming success of Twilight it became apparent that the bar is set very low in terms of actual writing, and semi-talented authors have been falling over one another attempting to write the most childish teen-drama imaginable desperately trying to appeal to the masses. Percy Jackson was too ambitious, using actual mythology to draw in a mindless audience like Vampires and Werewolves do, and the Host was apparently too out there. Hunger Games scrape by on a tissue thin plot that's augmented by a lot of internal-teen pondering, a dash of cliched romance and a healthy helping of violence - apparently the winning combination that struck gold once again.
Until Hollywood completely milks this new category dry we can look forward to many more amazing films in this vein like the upcoming Divergent - a tale about a young girl that dares to be different in a world where society is forced to be the same - there is a hot young guy with tattoos she falls in love with. Riveting.
Read the first book and watched the first film. Probably not going to bother with the second of either.
The film did a good job of realising the city and world. I don't think the author is a very good descriptive writer. Stanley Tucci was great.
The film didn't have the best part of the book. The feral creatures at the end are made of harvested and recognisable 'bits' of the dead kids, good stuff .
I disliked Battle Royale when I watched it four years ago. Loved the manga, which I read before that. Never read the book, because I was already somewhat tired of the story by then and expected the language to be less fluid translated.
Log in to comment