"The Hunger Games" (2012) Directed by Gary Ross, Produced by Nina Jacobson and John Kilik

[jasonc]

Feeling out of touch with the zeitgeist, I watched the first Hunger Games movie a couple of nights ago.

Generally, I'm predisposed to like post-apocalyptic science fiction movies with attractive lead actresses.

But I'm also predisposed to dislike movies based on teen novels.

So how would these two sources of bias interact?

(Plot Discussion and Minor Spoiler Alerts Follow)

I guess my conclusion is that if you can convince yourself that the plot device the movie is based on is plausible, then it's a pretty enjoyable movie.  The device, of course, is that this society keeps its proletariat in check by having each district submit two teenagers to a yearly battle royale in which only one survives ("The Hunger Games").  Donald Sutherland (the leader of this Nation) explains it as a way to remind the Nation of futility of previous uprisings, and provide hope, but not too much hope (hope for what, I couldn't say - perhaps hope that you or your child can be that one person who survives and lives on as some kind of pseudo-celebrity).  I should also say that the Hunger Games are televised and treated like the most popular reality show of all time in this world.  Sort of like the Truman Show.

So as I'm sort of indicating, you really have to do some mental backflips to make this twisted prison logic make sense.  My guess is the reason kids like it is the confluence of action, the there can only be one reality TV/Kardashian component, and the easy to draw social commentary (Obama is President Snow - OPEN YOUR EYES PEOPLE!).

It's also not hard, knowing there are two other installments, to figure out where this is all going.

But that said, it's a pretty well-executed action movie with a compelling performance by Jennifer Lawrence.  It's hard to not make parallels to her coming out party in Winter's Bone, which I'm sure the Hunger Games producers were much influenced by.  A  lot of similar ground is covered.  In both movies she hunts and cooks squirrels, is beat up, and takes care of a younger sister (and is indeed driven by her desire to protect her siblings).  Of course, it was all done in a much more evocative way in Winter's Bone, making it even harder to take Hunger Games seriously.

That said, Lawrence is a commanding presence, and there are times when she portrayed internal conflict in such a strong yet understated way that I had to pause to movie to try to figure out what I really thought she was feeling.  

My only other complaint is that, out of no where, we learn that the Hunger Game producers can manifest giant pumas at will and insert them anywhere in the tournament grounds.  That was a shocker.

[Sundae in the Park]

The second one is better.  The rather nonsensical world is already established in your mind, so you're predisposed to accept it with far less cognitive dissonance, and everyone within the movie makes rational choices in keeping with their established personalities and the strictures of the world. It makes good sense, as much as it can, and it's a rare case of the sequel outstripping the original.  Watching the second movie made me want to reread the books and start thinking about the world again, in a way that most movies versions of books do not (see: the first movie, which I actually thought was fine).  Also, the acting and directing have both improved.

[jasonc]

Feeling out of touch with the zeitgeist, I watched the first Hunger Games movie a couple of nights ago. 

Indeed, the nearly universal praise is another reason I decided to take the plunge on the first one