Just got back from seeing it, never read the books. I thought it was a good watch, suspenseful at some points, emotional at others. It definitely earned it's PG-13 rating, and you could tell they definitely could have made it a full on R-rated movie if they wanted. Worth going to see, imo. I enjoyed it. Again never read the book so I don't know how it compares to that.
Hunger Games
- Thread starter Nick R
- Start date
- Status
I didn't read the books and saw it yesterday. I had a few problems with the movie. The plot was to violent to be geared to children. The way the people hunted each other was very unrealistic. Camping in an open field, teaming up, etc. It was a entertaining watch but COULD have been much better, left a bad taste in my mouth.
The books are very simplistic, but aren't for children. I'm a bit shocked parents were bringing kids under 10 in the theater. I am certain some of those kids did not exactly follow the plot. The political content is interesting. I won't say there are parallels but let's just say their model chosen to calm the masses, hmmm, different from ours!
First of all the shaky camera was WAY overused. Almost constant. Very annoying. The acting was so-so. Katnip
is certainly more than 16. Sutherland hasn't aged in the last 90 years.
I was entertained by the movie. Could have been much better. Still have a headache. Honestly, wife got nauseous from the camera shaking and covered her eyes for most of the movie.
First of all the shaky camera was WAY overused. Almost constant. Very annoying. The acting was so-so. Katnip
I was entertained by the movie. Could have been much better. Still have a headache. Honestly, wife got nauseous from the camera shaking and covered her eyes for most of the movie.
Originally Posted By: Cutehumor
I'll be having this ready at my local library to pick up on dvd in a few months
Yeah, easier to look away from the wobbly camera!!
I'll be having this ready at my local library to pick up on dvd in a few months
Yeah, easier to look away from the wobbly camera!!
My 11 yr old daughter read the entire book in 2 days. She loved it and is mature enough to understand the situations portrayed in it.
Took her to the movie yesterday, we both enjoyed it. We talked a lot about it afterwards.
Talk to your kids about things. They want your input, and it helps them understand things a little better sometimes.
Took her to the movie yesterday, we both enjoyed it. We talked a lot about it afterwards.
Talk to your kids about things. They want your input, and it helps them understand things a little better sometimes.
Me and the wife enjoyed the movie. We've read the books, and as usual the books are far better. They just cant put the detail and emotion from a 400 page book in a 2.5 hour movie, lol
I must have been living in a cave somewhere as I've never heard of "Hunger Games" until the movie was being advertised.
Poor attention to detail.
LOL I think the arrow should be on THIS side of the hand holding the bow ?? (resting on the thumb or something)
Havne't seen it yet, but curious - might wait till it comes out on Blu Ray - it discourages me to see that stupid shaky cam has been overused...AGAIN! NOT gonna see it in the theatre for sure.
...I think JL looks cute when she says " I VOLUNTEER AS TRIBUTE !!"
The books were not for kids (AFAIK). (not all stories which have children/young adults as main characters are intended for child audiences!)
The movie shouldn't have been geared towards kids, which I guess watered it down. I am against that - there are enough movies / comedies / cartoons/ disney movies for kids (brats). Let the adults have the full force of a movie if the books were not intended for children.
Havne't seen it yet, but curious - might wait till it comes out on Blu Ray - it discourages me to see that stupid shaky cam has been overused...AGAIN! NOT gonna see it in the theatre for sure.
...I think JL looks cute when she says " I VOLUNTEER AS TRIBUTE !!"
The books were not for kids (AFAIK). (not all stories which have children/young adults as main characters are intended for child audiences!)
The movie shouldn't have been geared towards kids, which I guess watered it down. I am against that - there are enough movies / comedies / cartoons/ disney movies for kids (brats). Let the adults have the full force of a movie if the books were not intended for children.
According to the pictures above, she is NOT doing it correctly...
She is not smiling like the real hunters are!
She is not smiling like the real hunters are!
Originally Posted By: CivicFan
Originally Posted By: 97tbird
LOL I think the arrow should be on THIS side of the hand holding the bow ?? (resting on the thumb or something)
Not necessarily...
But in the Hunger Games pic, what is the arrow resting on? It seems to be positioned completely on the outside of her palm. I'm not an expert, but it does look weird.
Originally Posted By: 97tbird
LOL I think the arrow should be on THIS side of the hand holding the bow ?? (resting on the thumb or something)
Not necessarily...
But in the Hunger Games pic, what is the arrow resting on? It seems to be positioned completely on the outside of her palm. I'm not an expert, but it does look weird.
Its all CG...actors don't actually have to know how to shoot a bow and arrow these days...the draw on the string alone tells you that its not correct, her hand is too high on the string, making the arrow point down.
That being said I have never heard of this Hunger Games before the movie previews came out...
That being said I have never heard of this Hunger Games before the movie previews came out...
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Mixologist
Poor attention to detail.
Since there's some confusion on what's wrong here's a quick-ish summary of five major problems just in that pic:
First, the most obvious is that the arrow is resting on her left wrist instead of a proper rest which would be right up next to the bow. So if she were to let the arrow fly not only would the arrow not go anywhere near the target but the whole arrow itself could swing around using her wrist as the axis and end up smacking her in the side of the head or worse (seen it happen in real life) most likely the arrow would just fall a few feet from her. Second she has the arrow nocked way too high on the string, you want the arrow to be nocked right in the center of the string. The way she has it the arrow would NEVER fly to her target. Third, on a traditional bow like that one, usually you use the arrow as part of your sight so having it all discombobulated like that would make your aiming all messed up. Fourth, her form is all messed up, the end of the arrow should be touching or nearly touching the corner of her mouth and the string should be lightly touching her nose and why is she pointing? 'and finally, if you look real close you'll see that the cock feather is facing the bow which is 180* off and 100% wrong.
Poor attention to detail.
Since there's some confusion on what's wrong here's a quick-ish summary of five major problems just in that pic:
First, the most obvious is that the arrow is resting on her left wrist instead of a proper rest which would be right up next to the bow. So if she were to let the arrow fly not only would the arrow not go anywhere near the target but the whole arrow itself could swing around using her wrist as the axis and end up smacking her in the side of the head or worse (seen it happen in real life) most likely the arrow would just fall a few feet from her. Second she has the arrow nocked way too high on the string, you want the arrow to be nocked right in the center of the string. The way she has it the arrow would NEVER fly to her target. Third, on a traditional bow like that one, usually you use the arrow as part of your sight so having it all discombobulated like that would make your aiming all messed up. Fourth, her form is all messed up, the end of the arrow should be touching or nearly touching the corner of her mouth and the string should be lightly touching her nose and why is she pointing? 'and finally, if you look real close you'll see that the cock feather is facing the bow which is 180* off and 100% wrong.
I wouldn't be surprised that the arrow or maybe the entire bow and arrow were later added digitally and she never even drew any bow. It's amazing what they can add or alter digitally. For instance in the 20th anniversary edition of ET the agents guns they were pointing were changed to walky talkies.
Even so they could've digitally placed the bow and arrow more correctly it seems. But if you ignore the technicalities she looks good and that's all that matters, right
?
Even so they could've digitally placed the bow and arrow more correctly it seems. But if you ignore the technicalities she looks good and that's all that matters, right
Originally Posted By: Quattro Pete
Originally Posted By: CivicFan
Originally Posted By: 97tbird
LOL I think the arrow should be on THIS side of the hand holding the bow ?? (resting on the thumb or something)
Not necessarily...
But in the Hunger Games pic, what is the arrow resting on? It seems to be positioned completely on the outside of her palm. I'm not an expert, but it does look weird.
that's what i was trying to say...looks like it is hanging in mid-air somehow.
Originally Posted By: CivicFan
Originally Posted By: 97tbird
LOL I think the arrow should be on THIS side of the hand holding the bow ?? (resting on the thumb or something)
Not necessarily...
But in the Hunger Games pic, what is the arrow resting on? It seems to be positioned completely on the outside of her palm. I'm not an expert, but it does look weird.
that's what i was trying to say...looks like it is hanging in mid-air somehow.
- Status
Similar threads
