Reviews written by registered user
|2 reviews in total|
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
On the way home from the Hunger Games we went to the automatic car wash for a bit of entertainment. After wasting two and a half hours in the cinema, watching the suds on the windscreen was a treat. The Hunger Games is desperately slow and gormlessly obvious. The only surprises are supplied by the chronic stupidity of the characters (e.g. constantly wandering around in the open when people with bows and arrows want to kill them), the completely unexplained moral evolution of the good, the bad and the pathetic, the implausible action (e.g. outrunning monster dogs in the dense forest in the pitch dark), and the ludicrous special skills of the combatants (e.g. the ability to make oneself up to blend into rock without any make-up or a mirror). The combatants' acting is wooden. The game show hosts overact and dress stupidly. After the opening 45 minutes waiting for something interesting to happen, the film certainly made me think, but only about how a film as bad as this could be made, released and then positively reviewed. I resorted in the end to making witty asides to my companion and trying, successfully, to give her a fit of the giggles. The Hunger Games is a complete waste of time and electricity. I would like to say that it's the worst film I have ever seen, but I can't because I have seen Battle Los Angeles. Long ago, I saw Battle Royale, of which the Hunger Games appears to be a feeble copy, and I remember is being pretty engaging. Gary Ross, the writer and director of the Hunger Games has written and directed some great films like Big, Pleasantville and Seabiscuit. What happened this time?
I watched it on TV last week encouraged by the the very positive review
it was given by my TV guide.
It was hopeless dreary nonsense from the beginning and I only watched it to the end partly to see if it could get any worse - it did - and because I thought that it must some redeeming feature to have been described as "superb" by the reviewer - it didn't. The script is abominable, packed with clichés and unnatural monologues. The plot is pathetic and deteriorates. The acting isn't good and one actor is staggeringly wooden. The music is awful and the attempt at "future music" is like the logic my step-father once used in buying me a tie as a present when I was a teenager: "I thought this tie was awful, so I thought you'd like it".
The cars are particularly annoying. In a feeble attempt to copy Gattaca's stylish and subtle use of old Citroens as cars of the future, it uses some of the odder looking modern cars with bits of stuff crudely stuck on them. Clive Owen manages to push start one of them, pushing it uphill single-handedly.
It is like a drawn out episode of Dr Who with all the silliness but none of the self-awareness. The ending has to be sen to be believed - it could have been written by a ten-year-old. I've made better films on my mobile phone by pressing the record button by accident. How it can have been nominated for any Oscars, I cannot imagine.