To begin a frank admission; I have not read the Hunger Games
trilogy of books. Now, go straight to the bottom of this post and put the
various reasons why my opinion is no longer valid in the comments section.
Done? Good, now let us begin.
The Hunger Games
(the opening book and the film, not the trilogy. This could get confusing) introduces
us to the world of Panem; the North American landmass in the future following
what would appear to be a hugely destructive civil war. The protagonist,
Katniss Everdeen, comes from one of twelve backwater districts, reliant on
primary industry to get by, which lost the civil war and, as a result, are subjugated
by the Capitol as punishment for their treason.
One of their punishments is for each district to offer up a
boy and girl between the ages of 12 and 18 every year for a televised death
match (The Hunger Games) with only one winner, broadcast in the Capitol and
each of the districts. The winner’s district gets a reward of food, hence the
name of the game.
Much like (I imagine of course) the book, the film is
dripping with themes and gosh is it overt in showcasing these themes; in your
face is an understatement.
A satirical swipe at reality television is an over-arching
idea present as the Hunger Games is basically the X-Factor meets Love Island
meets Survivor (albeit a far more violent version) in a Truman Show reality.
The building-up of the back stories of the participants in the Hunger Games is
exactly the same as all of the aforementioned reality shows. The residents of
the Capitol (exquisitely dressed, snobbish and aristocratic) watch to see the
humiliation and the inhabitants of the districts (grubby workers) cannot help themselves
but watch, which sounds
familiar.
Another theme, more underlying than the reality TV satire is
of a class struggle with an exploited, looked down upon underclass forced to
work for the Capitol, an idea exacerbated by the momentum gathered throughout the
film of a rebellion and unity among the districts stirred by the actions of
Katniss in the Games.
In a nutshell, The
Hunger Games can be seen as Charlie Brooker’s Black Mirror’s take on reality television added to the dystopian
class struggle of 1984; not as powerful and epoch-defining as the latter but
certainly with a similar message for the 21st century.
Anyway, back to the film and the opening scene of the film
almost set me up to dislike it from the very beginning. A three minute long sequence
of the protagonist running through a forest and field shot with a handheld
camera for the shaky-cam effect; a style I find difficult to focus with.
However, once you get used to it, it is the best style for the film to go with
the rough and tumble of the action sequences later on. Kudos director Gary
Ross.
Speaking of, as impressively shot as the action sequences
were, the 12A certificate left them feeling a little empty. Whilst blood is
overused in modern day cinema, where the film is very explicit in outlining the
vicious and merciless world that the Hunger Games produces (hell, half the
players died in the first four minutes), no blood being spilled kind of makes
it seem not as real. It could have been more gritty and real with a 15
certificate but that alienates the early teenagers who make up a segment of the
book’s target audience. But what you can and can’t get away with in different
film classifications is another story for another day.
One area where a reading of the trilogy could have come in
handy is judging whether the lack of character development in the film is a
similar problem in the book. Weighing in at 142 minutes, The Hunger Games is lengthy but an extra twenty minutes wouldn’t have
done any harm to build more character identification with the audience. As
horrible as it was when Rue was killed, as we had only really known her 15
minutes (in which she saved the protagonist twice it should be noted) it didn’t
feel like a huge loss. The slow burning opening hour of the film could have
been cut to alleviate this problem but, to be fair, I’m no screenplay writer. I
write in my room, not at Starbucks.
The area where The
Hunger Games really outstrips its rivals in the young adult book adaptations
(Harry Potter and Twilight)is the performances from young actors, particularly
21-year old Jennifer Lawrence s Katniss who play the strong female lead to
perfection; tough but feminine in equal measure.
Overall, an enjoyable enough film and solid enough to prompt
this writer to both look forward to the next instalment of the trilogy (or four
films if rumours are prove to be true) by which time I shall indeed have read
all of the novels, thus making my opinion worthy of blogging about. Naturally.
No comments:
Post a Comment