The Hunger Games - Satisfying, Not Filling

The much anticipated film, The Hunger Games, opened this past weekend grossing more than one hundred fifty million dollars, making it the third largest domestic opening of all-time. The movie is based on the first book of the best-selling trilogy by Suzanne Collins about a dystopian future world, Panem, ruled by a totalitarian government that forces 24 teenagers to participate in a nationally televised fight to the death. If that description has not piqued your interest than you should stop reading now and definitely avoid all things Hunger Games. For the rest of you I have some good news and some bad news.

First, the good news. The Hunger Games movie is a solid, if not perfect, adaptation of a complex world and even more complex lead character, Katniss Everdeen. The movie focuses on Katniss' journey from living in the dirty, poor and rough world of District 12 through her training as a "tribute" in The Hunger Games to the dramatic conclusion of the annual "must-see" television event in the 12 districts of Panem. Thanks in large part to the involvement of the author in the writing of the screenplay, The Hunger Games touches every significant event of the book and successfully captures the essence of each main character and Panem itself. The casting is stellar and the acting is top-notch. The Hunger Games is a great example of good science-fiction that combines action with a political and moral message. Movie-goers will find themselves drawn into and believing that this dystopian world could exist and in some cases may not be too far from the world we live in today. Newcomers and casual fans of The Hunger Games will encounter an exciting story that largely lives up to the hype.

Now, the bad news. I realize this will not be a popular opinion but one that I feel compelled to share. Despite the many good points previously listed, I believe that The Hunger Games will fall short for some die-hard fans of the books. In my case, I walked into Regal 14 Cinemas on Friday night with very high expectations.  I not only wanted to see the characters come to life but I wanted to know them as I had in the books as fully fleshed-out complex characters who are neither good nor bad but like most of us, just real people. This is where I think The Hunger Games movie comes up short.  One hundred and forty-two minutes is just not enough time to fully develop all the characters as well as the book did and also showcase the major plot points necessary to move the film forward. The film also suffers from the fact it cannot be told in the first-person perspective as the book was able to do so effectively. This means in some cases movie-goers are left to piece together aspects of the story that the film does not have time to cover or can only reference in a quick line of dialogue.  I believe that those who love the book will be disappointed with the lack of depth of some characters and missing details in some scenes that link the story together.  I don't believe this is necessarily the fault of the filmmakers as much as it is the inherent drawback of film adaptations of books (). I just want to be clear that while The Hunger Games that I saw on Friday night was good, it was not nearly as great as the movie that I had imagined while reading the book.

The Final Cut - Don't miss your chance to see a great story put on film. The Hunger Games is worth your money and time. However, if you have read the book make sure to go in with reasonable expectations. If you haven't read the book make sure to pick it up after the movie so you  can read all the wonderful details that there is no time for in the movie adaptation of The Hunger Games.

Did you see The Hunger Games? What is your opinion? Remember to comment so you can help fellow Fredericksburg area citizens see the heroes and avoid the zeros.