Friday, March 23, 2012

"The Hunger Games" movie review.

Part One: The Acting
There was never a doubt in my mind that Jennifer Lawerence would be able to embody Katniss. She was able to portray all sides of Katniss perfectly. She reminded why Katniss is such a great character and was quite the inspiration to watch on screen.
Woody Harrelson as Haymitch was hilarious. He got that drunkard down to a T and his bantering back and forth with Elizabeth Banks as Effie Trinket was perfect! Elizabeth also did a wonderful job as Effie. She made you want to hit her, and then apologize afterwards because you know she means well.
Liam Hemsworth as Gale didn't get a lot of screen time, which was fine since he wasn't in the book all that much, but I could already tell that he is going to do a really good job playing Gale in the future movies.
I wasn't sure how I felt about Lenny Kravitz as Cinna when he was first announced as the actor, but after watching the movie I liked his portrayal and performance a lot. He was the calm throughout the whole movie and it was obvious that he truly cared for Katniss's well-being.
And oh my gosh, Stanley Tucci as Caesar Flickerman was one of my favorites. I love Stanley Tucci anyway, but he was wonderful, absolutely wonderful. He was also one of the comic reliefs in the film.
Donald Sutherland as President Snow was more terrifying than Voldemort. You could just tell that behind his calm demeanor and white beard, there was a madman.
Willow Shields as Primrose, Paula Malcomson as Mrs. Everdeen, and Amandla Sternberg as Rue were also wonderful. Prim and Rue reminded me so much of my little sisters, which made Rue's death even more heartbreaking.

But Josh Hutcherson as Peeta stole the show. When he was announced as the actor playing Peeta, I have to admit that I wasn't sure he was the right actor for the role.
Boy, was I dead wrong.
It's like Josh went into my mind, figured out how I imagined Peeta, and played him EXACTLY like that. By the end of the movie, I was a puddle on the ground. I have always loved Peeta, even more than Ron Weasley, and to see him so perfectly portrayed was more wonderful than words can describe.

Part Two: The Plot
They didn't leave out one single thing that was necessary for future plot development. Seriously.
Sure, they left out things and changed a few things around.
Katniss found the mockingjay pin instead of it being given to her by Madge, but Madge was essentially an unimportant character so it wasn't a big deal.
They cut down a lot of the stuff in the arena, like Katniss's search for water and food, but was that really necessary? Nope.
I think the success of the plot has to do with the fact that Suzanne Collins helped a lot with the screenplay. Whenever an author is the screenwriter or helps a lot with the process, it's a good sign that the movie is going to stay true to the book.

Part Three: Violence, effects, make-up, etc.
There was the perfect amount of violence in the movie. Some people might be critical and say that there wasn't, but they must not understand the true meaning of the book. Yes, it could have been very graphic and very bloody, but then they would be portraying exactly what Suzanne Collins was disagreeing with when she wrote the book. There was enough to leave you cringing, but not enough to make you gag.
The special effects and make-up were also very well done. I especially enjoyed the make-up of the Capitol citizens. It was so outlandish and gaudish; exactly like it's described in the book.
I also really enjoyed the scenery of District Twelve and the layout of the Capitol. The imagery in the movie was wonderful and truly captured the spirit of the novel.

Best book to movie adaption I have ever watched. It's in the top three of my favorite movies of all time, and if I had the money I would go see it again today. I don't see how any fan of the Hunger Games would NOT like the movie, but that is my personal belief.

Rating: A+

Thursday, March 22, 2012


I know I said that my next blog would be my review of The Hunger Games, but something has been on my mind today and I felt like sharing it.
(By the way, 5 hours!!!!!!!! :D)

Have you ever heard people say this?
"I don't want daughters when I grow up. They are too much work."
"Girls are hard to raise, so I just want sons."

I don't even know how many times I've heard people say this, and the REALLY sad thing is that it's usually from girls themselves.
Do we really think so low of ourselves as a gender that we don't want to even think about raising daughters?
Do you think so low of yourself that you seem to think it was difficult for your parents to raise you because of your gender?

My parents have had to raise four girls and one boy.
My own mother had this to say, "I would rather raise girls any day. Boys think too much with their penises."
Now, I'm not saying that girls are easier to raise than boys. I think each gender brings their own challenges to the table when you're raising them. But to say that girls are too difficult to raise is not only untrue, but rude and sexist.

I'm sorry if I offended anyone with this post, I truly am. But I am a firm believer in women's rights, and one of them is the right to NOT be hated for being a female. And personally, I can't wait to be the mother of daughters so I can teach them the proper way to be a lady.

Tuesday, March 20, 2012

2 days and 12 hours...

...until I'm sitting in the movie theatre waiting to FINALLY see The Hunger Games movie.

I'm actually kind of in a grumpy mood today because I don't think I can wait much longer.

I want to swoon over Peeta. I want to cheer for Katniss. I want to cry over Rue. I want to curse the Capitol. I want to feel the same exhilaration and thrill I did when I first read the book three years ago.

A lot of people have been going all ga-ga over comparing The Hunger Games to Twilight and Harry Potter, which is completely ridiculous.

Hunger Games: a book about government, freedom, independence, and violence
Twilight: a book about a girl needing a boy to survive
Harry Potter: a book about awesome

While Harry Potter will always be my FAVORITE book series (of all time, ever.) I am really happy that so many people are reading The Hunger Games. I think it's safe to say that I know more people that have read Katniss's story than have read Harry's.
And I'm a big enough HP fan to realize why that is.

1. Hunger Games is much shorter than HP. While I enjoyed reading all seven books, the average person just doesn't enjoy reading that much. All three HG books are short and easy to read, which is perfect for the average reader.
2. HP is about magic and considered to be fantasy. HG is more realistic/futuristic fiction. People are more drawn to HG's plot than one of fantasy and magic, because, to be frank, people don't like using their imagination anymore.

I say this not to say that Hunger Games is trash compared to Harry Potter. I say it, because I think they are two completely different series, and one is just naturally going to attract more readers. I also have noticed that people who don't enjoy reading, like my little brother and one of my best friends, loved reading the books.
So, if the Hunger Games are making more people read, I think that's the best thing EVER.

So until my next blog post, which will be my review of the movie, may the odds be ever in your favor.

Oh, Peeta! <3