The Hunger Games
I hadn't read the book ' The Hunger Games' so I had no frame of reference to carry when I decided to watch this movie. A lot of my friends and online pals had recommended it. Adding to it was fact that it's directed by Garry Ross of Pleasantville fame and a near impressive 7.4 rating on IMDb. I couldn't afford to miss out on a candidate with such impressive resume.
Now after spending 2 hrs 22 minutes on this movie, I neither grudge the recommendations nor the ratings. From entertainment point of view alone, the movie should deserve it laurels. The dystopian setting of the future USA is shown convincingly -although I feel it comes nowhere close to masterful dystopia of 'Children of Men'. The direction is taut, story moves briskly and there are sufficient number of thrills, tensions and suspense points put in to keep viewers in their seats.
On the other hand this movie is also a perfect example of what bad actors and two dimensional direction can do to a script laden with so much potential. Perhaps Ross and the directional crew allowed themselves to be overwhelmed by scope of story to ignore the casting as well those finer points that could have elevated The Hunger Games from the general to master class.
To begin with, Jennifer Lawrence has given an unbelievingly shallow performance in the lead role that deserved someone of far better acting capabilities. She has a blasé wide- eyed-open- mouthed expression to which she has resolutely stuck in every scene no matter what's the situation. To realize that just watch the scenes where she volunteers herself for death games or when she enters the chariot parade or when announcements changing the rules of games are made during the death struggle. It's easier to spot a change in frame than any change in her expression. I wonder what richness and range of emotions someone as talented as Emma Watson could have brought to this role.
Second, the complex relationship between Jennifer Lawrence (Katniss Everdeen) and Josh Hutcherson (Peeta Mellar) looks hustled and compressed in a very uneven tableau. The character of Peeta Mellar is presented as an opportunist, calculative and manipulative through a third of the movie, which Katniss detests. Then suddenly she changes the mind ( not the expression :) ) and falls for him. It's like a phase change. One minute there is nothing. Next minute there is love and understanding.
Then there are those minor imperfections which don't stop a movie from earning millions But they sure help decide in its elimination from hall of fame. The Hunger Game has several of these imperfections. The most glaring one is the Spick and span looks of contenders even after rounds of bloodshed and spending several days in wilderness. All the time they give an appearance of having just stepped out of shower after a good 8 hours sleep. Also despite the continuous talk of deprivation and food scarcity in the 13 districts, the characters look so well fed and cared that I thought perhaps only kind of hunger known to the film makers is one that they feel on account of a skipped snacks.
To conclude for me The Hunger Games was a good one time watch but I do not opt to keep it in my library for an encore.
My rating. 6 out of 10.
I hadn't read the book ' The Hunger Games' so I had no frame of reference to carry when I decided to watch this movie. A lot of my friends and online pals had recommended it. Adding to it was fact that it's directed by Garry Ross of Pleasantville fame and a near impressive 7.4 rating on IMDb. I couldn't afford to miss out on a candidate with such impressive resume.
Now after spending 2 hrs 22 minutes on this movie, I neither grudge the recommendations nor the ratings. From entertainment point of view alone, the movie should deserve it laurels. The dystopian setting of the future USA is shown convincingly -although I feel it comes nowhere close to masterful dystopia of 'Children of Men'. The direction is taut, story moves briskly and there are sufficient number of thrills, tensions and suspense points put in to keep viewers in their seats.
On the other hand this movie is also a perfect example of what bad actors and two dimensional direction can do to a script laden with so much potential. Perhaps Ross and the directional crew allowed themselves to be overwhelmed by scope of story to ignore the casting as well those finer points that could have elevated The Hunger Games from the general to master class.
To begin with, Jennifer Lawrence has given an unbelievingly shallow performance in the lead role that deserved someone of far better acting capabilities. She has a blasé wide- eyed-open- mouthed expression to which she has resolutely stuck in every scene no matter what's the situation. To realize that just watch the scenes where she volunteers herself for death games or when she enters the chariot parade or when announcements changing the rules of games are made during the death struggle. It's easier to spot a change in frame than any change in her expression. I wonder what richness and range of emotions someone as talented as Emma Watson could have brought to this role.
Second, the complex relationship between Jennifer Lawrence (Katniss Everdeen) and Josh Hutcherson (Peeta Mellar) looks hustled and compressed in a very uneven tableau. The character of Peeta Mellar is presented as an opportunist, calculative and manipulative through a third of the movie, which Katniss detests. Then suddenly she changes the mind ( not the expression :) ) and falls for him. It's like a phase change. One minute there is nothing. Next minute there is love and understanding.
Then there are those minor imperfections which don't stop a movie from earning millions But they sure help decide in its elimination from hall of fame. The Hunger Game has several of these imperfections. The most glaring one is the Spick and span looks of contenders even after rounds of bloodshed and spending several days in wilderness. All the time they give an appearance of having just stepped out of shower after a good 8 hours sleep. Also despite the continuous talk of deprivation and food scarcity in the 13 districts, the characters look so well fed and cared that I thought perhaps only kind of hunger known to the film makers is one that they feel on account of a skipped snacks.
To conclude for me The Hunger Games was a good one time watch but I do not opt to keep it in my library for an encore.
My rating. 6 out of 10.