I am quite amazed that after seeing Kinji Fukasaku’s wonderfully violent satire Battle Royale more or less banned/undistributed in Canada and the US, we are getting a huge glossy franchise that involves teens killing teens for sport. With Lynne Ramsay’s We Need to Talk About Kevin and the host of other interesting school shooting films, I guess the good ship Columbine has sailed and these stories are OK to do however one pleases.
Either way, Lion’s Gate has posted the trailer for the first of three (possibly more) films, The Hunger Games, which stars Donald Sutherland, Woody Harrelson and up-and-comer Jennifer Lawrence (Winter’s Bone, X-Men: First Class). Expect the Twi-hards to get a boner for these films (as I imagine the books are appealing to the same demographic) and along those lines, I imagine that Gary Ross and company are going to do this subject in as vanilla a fashion as possible.
Oh, and full disclosure, I have not read these books, so I have no idea about fan-minutiae on how close the film adaptation is going to be. But feel free to educate me in the comment sections.
And while we are at it, if they can make this type of film, wither a big screen adaptation of Stephen King’s The Long Walk?
The trailer is tucked under the seat.
OK. OK. Now that you’ve watched the above awesomeness that is the original Battle Royale, you can go to Apple for the actual Hunger Games Trailer, which doesn’t quite embarass itself even though there is more pageantry that I care for, personally.
AMEN(!) to your Stephen King comment. Though after a recent re-read, I doubt a film adaptation will get at the nuance of that script.
As for this movie. I’m really torn on the subject. The first book was really good – a bit juvenile, but great ideas, great characters and a dysfunctional future society split into very unique districts and citizens/society all makes for pretty compelling story telling. So it’s fairly fluffy but still a pretty good read.
I’ve said from the get-go these movies are going to be horrible in comparison (and horrible not in comparison), but after seeing this trailer it looks a bit better than I thought it would be. Yes, overly glossy, but I think it looks like alright fare for fans of the book. For fans of Battle Royale (of which I never read the graphic novel), maybe not so much…
Also, I’m quite curious what rating this film will have. I’m sure it’s going to be PG-13 which is unfortunate not only for the violence factor that should be there but also for the potential for more adult subject matter.
Battle Royale (Koushun Takami) is a print novel first and foremost. I have an english translation, and it’s really good.
There may be a graphic novel version, but it’s not the principal source material.
What’s gives me some hope is that this trailer doesn’t even show the games. Everything here is lead-up to the event (which is how it should be). The “battle” itself is really second tier to everything else that is going on around this three book story. The games actually only take up about 1/2 of the first book. So if they stay focused on characterization and plot and less about bows and arrows, nifty tree bouncing and all the traps and gifts stuff, this is what will make the movie actually work.
Also, one thing that sets the action in this movie apart from others like it is that the action starts immediately, desperately and savagely (as evidenced by the very end of this trailer). Everything starts instantly and compactly. I like that rather than wandering some island for hours getting to know the characters that way.
That’s seriously the main character’s name? Are you fucking kidding me?
This is a futuristic sci-fi/fantasy movie Nat (that I don’t even remember for sure if it’s on Earth or not). “Katniss” actually does have a meaning and significance within the world. All of the characters have strange names (which I actually like). e.g. Haymitch, Rue, Cinna, Seneca, Trexler, Peeta, Atala, etc.
But holy balls I was reading the boards over at IMDb this morning regarding the new trailer. It makes me wanna puke -a bunch of twelve year old girls shitting themselves with excitement (ala Twilight).
Yea, Names aren’t a big deal in these sorts of affairs. One of my favourite books has the main Japanese-American lead go by the name of Hiro Protagonist. Of course, that’s a bit too tongue in cheek, but no big deal.
Andrew: on the internet all men above 30 [beat] are 12 year old girls.
touché
Oh I don’t doubt that it has meaning, but isn’t it a little over the top? Why not just call her “Pussy-like”? And “Peeta”? Seriously? There’s a character named after a sandwich bread.
It is called Hunger games.
I’m with you Andrew – looks far better than I anticipated.
Nat: One word: CHEWBACCA.
“Greedo” for that matter, but I see your point. But it’s still damn stupid, and I didn’t mention it, but well done on the Battle Royale joke.
WOW. Only 18 reviews up, but so far this is at 100% on Rotten Tomatoes. With that kind of traction, I doubt it will ever fall much below 90%.
Thursday. I am now stoked.
No matter how hard I try and I just cannot get excited for this movie. For whatever reason it just makes me want to re-watch The Fifth Element.
Guess I’ll just wait for your reviews then decide whether it’s worth seeing.
Ya know, I’m not that excited either. I am however extremely curious. But then again, I read the book so I wanna see how it turns out on screen. The positive reviews give me hope!
Andrew is doing a stand up job of repeating The Man of Earth thread all over again.
“Also, one thing that sets the action in this movie apart from others like it is that the action starts immediately, desperately and savagely (as evidenced by the very end of this trailer).”
“holy balls”
“WOW”
“I am now stoked”
“I am not that excited.”
All without even seeing the movie. You know Andrew, its ok to be a fanboy. Just accept it, and you’ll stop having to qualify your love so much.
Yeah I think it looks really good and I’m looking forward to checking it out. “WOW” was in reaction to the critical reviews, not the film itself. But yeah, I’m a fairly big fan of the book. Though I only read the first one and I didn’t really like the ending that much. Labeling me as a “fanboy” is a bit much. More than anything, I’m just really really really curious.
I’m actually more looking forward to Ewan McGregor this weekend over Ms. Lawrence.
Also, the “holy balls” quote you pulled is completely out of context. Nice try though.
Your intial quote is also a declarative statement about the actual film taken from a few seconds of a trailer. Its a hard sell based on a marketing campaign and not the actual product. Welcome to fanboy 101.
Come on in, the water’s fine!
This new line of goading on Andrew by Gamble is highly amusing.
I wonder what Gamble was like in high school.
I know this is a played out comparison but it still seems like it’s Twilight just with better actors. And all the guys I know that read the books seem like their overcompensating just so it doesn’t look like their reading teenage girl novels.
Top Critics have it at 84% and falling on Rotten Tomatoes so far. My guess is the film ends up somewhere in the 70% range.
I will say this, Lion’s Gate has done a bang up job of marketing a teen romance novel as a sci-fi action epic that has quickly become the first must-see movie of the year for mainstream audiences. Disney should be taking notes.
Yea, but how much disappointment is this ‘marketing build up’ going to yield for HG? I was tapped out in JANUARY!
Andrew wants me to see it before the next cinecast, but I’m not sure if I want to brave opening weekend idiot-crowds.
We have friends who want to see it with us, but not opening weekend. I’m guessing we’ll make the decision to see it now or wait until next week based on whether The Raid shows up in our theatres this weekend. No one has posted their weekend showtimes yet, so I’m not sure. That’ll trump Hunger Games if it’s out.
The Raid is the real deal in terms of no-nonsense bone-crunching entertainment. See it on the Big Screen. !
I’d avoid opening weekend like the plague. I wouldn’t be surprised if this thing ends up pushing a $90 million open.
Amusing and probably razor accurate:
“In fact, “The Hunger Games” is precisely the thing it pretends to disapprove of: a pulse-elevating spectacle meant to distract us from the unsatisfying situation of the real world, and to offer a simulated outlet for youthful disaffection and anxiety (in this case, the anxieties of girls and young women in particular). Bread and circuses, only without the bread, and pretending to be anti-circus. I’m not claiming that’s anything new in pop culture, and it certainly isn’t a crime. Furthermore, the shapeless politics of “The Hunger Games” have very little to do with the question of whether it’s any good, although they do illustrate how calculated the whole project is.”
-Andrew O’Hehir (Salon)
Apparently my screening is a private screening for “just a handful of people”
if that’s true, cool!
Want to see this very Italian ‘Most Dangerous Game’ style film:
Marcello Mastroianni and Ursula Andress
It’s pretty entertaining Kurt, but lower your expectations somewhat. Some great set design and a great opening with Ursula, but it starts to fall a bit flat as it goes along. I like it, but I really wanted to like it a whole lot more. It may also depend on how dated it will feel to you. Others love the crap out of it, though, so don’t go by me…
Hunger Games (The Movie); A review in 3 sentences:
“There are no rules to the world, meaning that it’s bad sci-fi. There are no parameters to the game, meaning that it’s bad thriller. And there’s no real interest for the non-initiated, meaning it’s bad art.”
-Walter Chaw
http://www.filmfreakcentral.net/screenreviews/hungergames.htm