Lionsgate | Release Date: March 23, 2012
7.0
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 1990 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
1,385
Mixed:
393
Negative:
212
Watch Now
Stream On
Stream On
Buy on
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Expand
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
6
corkyberlinMar 24, 2012
It's tough rating this movie, because there is a lot to like - but it seems so intent on being the first in a series that it just barely stands on its own two feet. Really, I'm afraid that people who haven't read the books aren't going toIt's tough rating this movie, because there is a lot to like - but it seems so intent on being the first in a series that it just barely stands on its own two feet. Really, I'm afraid that people who haven't read the books aren't going to have the first clue about how good this story actually is and I wonder what this movie could have been if they'd allowed it to be it's own story as opposed to just a set up for the profit monster they expect the second and third parts to be. Not to mention, for a story called "The Hunger Games" you'd figure food would be a larger part of the story (as in the book), but there is surprisingly little of anything related to poverty, hunger, or food that contribute so much to who Peeta and Katniss (not to mention district 11's Rue) are as characters.

What's the like? Jennifer Lawrence, Stanley Tucci, and seeing how the games are run.
What's to hate? Really underdeveloped characters, poor pacing really hampers emotionally significant moments, and the camera work is at times amateurish.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
BigFatFattyMar 24, 2012
I didn't read the books at all but ya I guess this was alright. A lot like Battle Royale but in some sort of weird American/Ancient Roman future. The pacing was a little slow and the action was poorly shot but the story was alright and II didn't read the books at all but ya I guess this was alright. A lot like Battle Royale but in some sort of weird American/Ancient Roman future. The pacing was a little slow and the action was poorly shot but the story was alright and I liked how the style of the Capital. I wish the movie was R rated so I can see those kids really tear each other apart. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
jordan7guilloryMar 24, 2012
The Hunger games has put out a movie with action romance and suspense all at the same time. This movie had me on the edge of my seat. This is a must see movie and i cant wait till the new one comes out Catching Fire!
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
9
VerticityMar 24, 2012
If you're looking for a direct copy and paste of the book, you may be left disappointed. As expected, some non-important filler parts were left out for time constraints (the movie was already two hours and thirty minutes). At first, I didn'tIf you're looking for a direct copy and paste of the book, you may be left disappointed. As expected, some non-important filler parts were left out for time constraints (the movie was already two hours and thirty minutes). At first, I didn't really think about it. This movie, as promising as the book, may leave you a bit empty if you're looking for something overly 'epic'. The amount of action suits the book perfectly, therefore does justice to the series. I think the director did well, however, if you've not read the book you will most likely not fully enjoy the movie. After thinking about it, this movie has some really deep points that are so true within our everyday world, which can only be reflected in film. THIS is the best thing that the movie did, tying with the action thus making the flow better. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
7
kkrulecMar 24, 2012
I have not read the books, so I'm evaluating this strictly as movie, not as adaptation of book. Generally I was satisfied with the movie. It's not brilliant but it's worth considering. However it felt shallow on parts. Especially characterI have not read the books, so I'm evaluating this strictly as movie, not as adaptation of book. Generally I was satisfied with the movie. It's not brilliant but it's worth considering. However it felt shallow on parts. Especially character development. Also some segments were not explained enough. I don't know anything about this post-apocalyptic world. So for public like me, non readers, there should be some segments that more obviously explain stuff.
Nevertheless I'm happy with cast. Mostly. Also visually movie is rich. Contrast between capitol and districts is well made. And killing scenes are well handled for the target group. At the end of the day it teen movie.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
10
CraxmeraxMar 24, 2012
When I stepped out of the movie theater, I had a feeling of absolute joy! I was sitting there with a rapid heart rate throughout the whole movie. I read the books before I saw the movie and the books are magnificent! The perhaps best part ofWhen I stepped out of the movie theater, I had a feeling of absolute joy! I was sitting there with a rapid heart rate throughout the whole movie. I read the books before I saw the movie and the books are magnificent! The perhaps best part of it was the acting. My god, Jennifer Lawrence is a brilliant actor! I was also very impressed of Josh Hutcherson. To summarize: Go see this movie! Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
10
MattJenkiMar 24, 2012
Fantastic adaptation of the book. Jennifer Lawrence is again wonderful and the film made me laugh and cry. Dont worry about the 12A rating it is all implied and in most cases shows the deaths anyway. DIRECTORS cut will be FAB! a*****************
5 of 10 users found this helpful55
All this user's reviews
4
LutharoMar 24, 2012
I was quite disappointed by the Hunger games. There is nothing wrong with using such a heavily recycled idea, but the entire purpose of the idea of an inescapable death-match scenario is to have incredibly gripping psychological drama thatI was quite disappointed by the Hunger games. There is nothing wrong with using such a heavily recycled idea, but the entire purpose of the idea of an inescapable death-match scenario is to have incredibly gripping psychological drama that leaves the viewer/reader (in the case of the better form of battle royale) anguished at the tragedy of the event. This did not occur in the slightest, and there are a few reasons why. The acting was bland, the main contenders felt more like human masks than the deep and complex beings that they need to be to make this idea actually work. Their individual deaths or suffering left absolutely no impact on the viewer. Linked to this is the fact that the actual character development was sorely lacking. The pacing of the movie was problematic, the idea seemed interesting at first but it wasn't until around 1hr 30mins that the goal it was building towards actually happened. On a different note, the action itself (an important component of the idea) was limited and confusing, with so much fancy camera work going on it was hard to tell what was actually happening. In saying that though the futuristic element, was a refreshing take and the cinematography re its futuristic nature was very impressive. For me the highlight of the film was Stanley Tucci, he was as fantastic as ever. Expand
7 of 16 users found this helpful79
All this user's reviews
10
FreitagMar 24, 2012
I loved the books, the movie was sensational. Collins' is most certainly proud of her vision brought to life on the Big Screen. This movie is a must see for fans and for strangers to Collins' breathtaking trilogy.

All I have left to say,
I loved the books, the movie was sensational. Collins' is most certainly proud of her vision brought to life on the Big Screen. This movie is a must see for fans and for strangers to Collins' breathtaking trilogy.

All I have left to say, to "Kat Murphy, Special to MSN Movies", is "who are you again?" This woman who so loved the books, but trashed the movie, is the woman who loves bean paste in her cheesecake. Her "eclectic" taste in movies has bled her of every reasonable perception of top notch entertainment. Take your Eel ice-cream and Geoduck sausage taste for movies Kat Murphy, the rest of us plan to enjoy the wonderful Double Fudge brownie with a side of taste-bud tingling Espresso Bean ice cream movie any day. Hunger Games is one of the most tasty visionary treats I've had the pleasure of seeing in a long time.
Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
7
KenmeiMar 24, 2012
I didn't exactly know what to expect going into seeing this movie. I personally have only read the first book in the series and there are a few things that books can do that movies can't, like spending ALOT of time developing the charactersI didn't exactly know what to expect going into seeing this movie. I personally have only read the first book in the series and there are a few things that books can do that movies can't, like spending ALOT of time developing the characters while movies need to introduce them and move on. I personally felt like the story between Katniss and her mother, particularly the reason why there's such a rift between them, was overlooked, but they were barely featured in the movie even if her family is her motivation to participate in the Games. I felt like the relationship between Peeta and Katniss was kinda forced in the movie and just generally didn't seem to flow very well with everything else. Katniss' relationship with Rue was the best part of the movie and really brought the emotional roller coaster to it's greatest height. I thought everything else about the movie was very well done and it definitely was fun to watch. However expect some of the movie limitations on character development to dampen your opinion of this movie if your an avid fan of the series as you won't get anywhere near the amount of development that the book can bring. But fans and newcomers to the series alike will both like this movie as it still does a good job selling the raw emotions that each of the characters bring. Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
8
racketracerMar 23, 2012
A great adaptation of the novel that Gary Ross does well with much help from Jennifer Lawrence's great performance. An immersible experience with Ross's directing, he carefully places The Hunger Games a movie for any audience, displaying theA great adaptation of the novel that Gary Ross does well with much help from Jennifer Lawrence's great performance. An immersible experience with Ross's directing, he carefully places The Hunger Games a movie for any audience, displaying the underlying emotion, violence, and steady storyline for the fans of the novel and newcomers alike. Lawrence really embodies herself as Katniss and displays another award worthy consideration. While The Hunger Games is a great start, it seems as there is a large potential in the trilogy that Ross is not fully uncovering. Needless, Catching Fire hopefully is something that expands the initial story to more epic proportions like The Dark Knight did with Batman. Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
10
TrevorCantuMar 23, 2012
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Based on Suzanne Collins' Hunger Games trilogy, in a futuristic time where a nation had fallen apart after a horrific war two tributes from each district are chosen to fight to the death until one victor remains in what you would call a reality television show that is broad cast live to audiences. To those who are familiar with The Hunger Games trilogy, prepared to be impressed with this sensational adaptation and to those who aren't, prepare to witness an incredible journey filled with suspense and originality.



Katniss (Jennifer Lawrence), a citizen of District 12 volunteers to tribute for The Hunger Games to save her little sister Prim from being tribute. Against a fellow citizen Peeta (Josh Hitcherson) who she develops a relationship with, has to fight to the death and although we don't see much of Gale (Liam Hemsworth), there is a clear understanding of their relationship and how he feels for her. Katniss must fight for her life on this suspenseful and emotional must see journey.



Filled with convincing performances by all the cast, The Hunger Games is a winner! Staying true to the book, director Gary Ross does a flawless job of introducing the first of the trilogy. It's an emotional fight to the victory that instantly captures you. A fearless adaptation where every minute keeps you enthralled. With its inventive story and strong cast, The Hunger Games works on screen and ends on top .
Expand
13 of 20 users found this helpful137
All this user's reviews
10
TerryHMar 23, 2012
The movie was very entertaining. I didn't know anything about the books, and so going in as a complete noob I found the movie easily understood. A great book-movie tie in. Loved in, not a dull moment. A lot of great moments!
3 of 8 users found this helpful35
All this user's reviews
10
CoDFatherMar 23, 2012
Dear reviewers and review readers,
I come bearing great news about a tale that will exhilarate your body and soul. It's name is The Hunger Games. Though I did not read the trilogy, I felt that this movie topped many other movies that I have
Dear reviewers and review readers,
I come bearing great news about a tale that will exhilarate your body and soul. It's name is The Hunger Games. Though I did not read the trilogy, I felt that this movie topped many other movies that I have seen in the past few years and maybe more if I thought deep enough. I am sure that I missed some information but if you understand movies like a mature professional, then it is very easy to catch onto. Don't be one of those people who obsess over making movies seem very terrible because they don't want to be hipsters. If you can withstand two and a half hours of every emotion that you can see in a movie, then you will absolutely love the Hunger Games.
Expand
4 of 13 users found this helpful49
All this user's reviews
9
MarZ_0878Mar 23, 2012
The move was GREAT! It was missing very little explanatory details that if you read the book, you would spot. But, two thumbs up! The casting was perfect and my questions about if Josh Hutcherson was a good pick for Peeta was answered with a Yes.
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
3
JesrinMar 23, 2012
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Unfortunately, this movie didn't cut it for me. The characters were bland and two-dimensional, the cinematography left something to be desired, and the plot moved by so quickly that nothing was given adequate time. Like Katniss's relationships with Peeta and Gale. Or her time spent with Rue. Quite honestly, I needed these relationships to be formed and dwelt upon at length in the film in order to give the Games the meaning that they needed. Unless the characters (and the viewer) have something to lose, a movie can never achieve true emotional involvement and suspense. All in all, this was an unfortunate disappointment. Expand
6 of 17 users found this helpful611
All this user's reviews
9
KimLpersonalMar 23, 2012
I do not get the negative reviews? The movie followed the book quite closely which I had hoped for and was not disappointed! Yes some of the richness of the book was left out but still for 2.5 hr long as is. I forgive some trimming. TheI do not get the negative reviews? The movie followed the book quite closely which I had hoped for and was not disappointed! Yes some of the richness of the book was left out but still for 2.5 hr long as is. I forgive some trimming. The acting was excellent loved Jennifer in Winters Bone and she did Katniss perfectly! I will rave and recommend friends see it! Expand
14 of 24 users found this helpful1410
All this user's reviews
10
MajorBobMar 23, 2012
I haven't read the books yet but I certainly will now that I have had the pleasure of seeing one of the best films in recent memory. The screenplay is tight and fast paced but the story keeps its integrity throughout the film. The acting isI haven't read the books yet but I certainly will now that I have had the pleasure of seeing one of the best films in recent memory. The screenplay is tight and fast paced but the story keeps its integrity throughout the film. The acting is first class and Jennifer Lawrence will have a long and prosperous career unless she does something really stupid. (see Lohan, Lindsay). The only criticism I have is that they "dumbed down" the graphic violence to get a PG13 rating. The killings are done so quickly and cleanly that the camera barely gives you time to realize what has happened. The "anti- CSI effect" sanitizes the brutality of the contest and in a way it hides the evil of the adults who have orchestrated these "games." I look forward to the sequels with same anticipation of the Harry Potter movies. Expand
16 of 29 users found this helpful1613
All this user's reviews
7
cabritaMar 23, 2012
The hunger games' largest problem is that it chooses to emphacize on it's dramatic material between the lovebirds over it's thematic material. Does the film do the book justice? kind of I guess. Will all the teen girls that go see this filmThe hunger games' largest problem is that it chooses to emphacize on it's dramatic material between the lovebirds over it's thematic material. Does the film do the book justice? kind of I guess. Will all the teen girls that go see this film be happy they sure will. This does not meen i did not enjoy it, it just meens it could have been a lot better by taking a few more risks as the critics like to say. Expand
1 of 3 users found this helpful12
All this user's reviews
6
FDT44Mar 23, 2012
Though the concept is hardly an original one, "The Hunger Games," directed by Gary Ross ("Pleasantville," "Seabiscuit," and the upcoming "Catching Fire"), visually details the first installment of the widely acclaimed dystopian trilogyThough the concept is hardly an original one, "The Hunger Games," directed by Gary Ross ("Pleasantville," "Seabiscuit," and the upcoming "Catching Fire"), visually details the first installment of the widely acclaimed dystopian trilogy written by Suzanne Collins. Taking a page or two from earlier films of a similar variety, as in a much tamer account of Fukasaku's "Battle Royale" (2001) and delivering the same satirical overtones and vision of runaway celebrity culture and reality-tv obsession like Weir's "The Truman Show" (1998), the film shines in its tense tone and from a couple of its leads (Lawrence and Hutcherson), though is lessened by its invariably unstable, twitchy camerawork (using three angles at times) and over-editing swiftness --despite its intentions to make for intensified pathos and a neurotic dystopia--which fails to match the book's same sense of loss from death and the competition's ubiquitous ambiance of uncompromising gravity and carnage. Notwithstanding the camerawork, editing errors, and violence-saving restraint (let's not forget its rated PG-13), 'Games' is very much engrossing; the one-hundred and forty-four minute runtime never seems too tedious or soporific. Moreover, the film retains its grip on the viewer's attention much in part to its nimbly brisk pace and stunning cinematography. Lawrence is really what puts 'Games' on the same map as "Harry Potter" and further away from "Twilight;" she has a calming innocence that is both steady and assuring to the viewer, and blue eyes that are equally riveting. If viewers are familiar with her in "Winter's Bone," the same barefaced committment is brought to her character Katniss Everdeen, the bow-and-arrow-slinging heroine, who volunteers for her eleven-year old sister in the annual "Hunger Games." It is through Katniss that audiences become genuinely concerned with the competition's outcome; rooting for the heroine over even her District 12-adversarily-forced friend Peeta (Hutcherson). His character attires a strong, affecting visage that tears the viewer momentarily for whom to continue to cheer for; Katniss still wins over the crowd. But even more effective, is the film's transition from the book, which is told in first-person (Katniss as the focal point), to an omni-prescent scope. With this clever, and much safer, modification, the audience gets to see both the Hunger Games control room (the studio show stage) as well as the artifical, environmentally-staged battlefield. Furthermore, the continual change of pace from hunting (the action) and the scripted show (presentation) mimicks a "real-life" reality premise where audiences see both the physical confrontation and the manipulated, interviews, pre-game ceremonies and beauty-style pagentry, laden with flamboyant fashion and persistent directing coordinators. The control room, as in all of the film's setting, draws a strong, at times too close, semblance to "Fifth Element;" apparently Hollywood's only visual representative take on what the future world will be. Amalgamated from this "reality-show" are hosts and staff, some memorable, and some one would like to repress. Among the former, is madcap, blue-bouffant, male-Oprah-like Stanley Tucci, the horrificly bearded high-tech coordinator, Wes Bentley, and the long, wooly white, lion mane coiffure of Donald Sutherland as the usually distinguished and mellifluous, President Snow of the 'Games'; he is demonically brutal in his antagonistic role. As a whole, 'Hunger' is a film that is steered money first into a consuming demographic (13-19), and restrains itself knowingly from achieving brilliance by ensuring it stays the course. Though it starts as if it will last an eternity, and stand amongst cinematic grandeur, the film inexorably loses it steam and transmutes into the melodrammatic plodding in the woods that follows the "Twilight" series far too subserviently. In addition to the increasingly eggregious display of treacle adolescent-romance and fluff, the initial brilliant cinematography by Tom Stern is supplanted with noticeably cooler, more mundane tones. And, once the fighting itself begins, the teens on the battlefield are just not given the same degree of complexity and richness as the adults; they are seen as sheer psychopaths with no souls. Moreover, the need to add the laboriously dull and done-before love triangle only frames what will hopefully "tie-in" in the next installment, but the incipient longing for relationships does not put an effective cap on this origin account. Not endowing the same cultural study of class critique, as the superior "Battle Royale," 'Games' is obviously too Hollywood for its own good, eliminating some of the greater meanings the film desires to fulfill. The crux of the point: breaking box-office records is more important than making breaking one's highest expectations; settling for green is the greater compromise. Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
6
DANEgerMar 23, 2012
Stunningly decent, yes that is how i think i will describe this it is strange almost like the concept is well done yet still not allowed to flourish. The over all scope of things is easily grasped and i can respect keeping it PG-13 for it'sStunningly decent, yes that is how i think i will describe this it is strange almost like the concept is well done yet still not allowed to flourish. The over all scope of things is easily grasped and i can respect keeping it PG-13 for it's audience but it is just a little to lacking in detail, the book is deep, rich and complex while the movie lack the same stunning epic feel Expand
0 of 3 users found this helpful03
All this user's reviews
10
thebigswitchMar 23, 2012
To me the Hunger Games was sort of like Lord of the Flies meets Mad Max. Has anyone read Lord of the Flies or seen Mad Max with Mel Gibson? There was also a Japanese movie called Battle Royale that came out a few years ago but was neverTo me the Hunger Games was sort of like Lord of the Flies meets Mad Max. Has anyone read Lord of the Flies or seen Mad Max with Mel Gibson? There was also a Japanese movie called Battle Royale that came out a few years ago but was never released in the US. Expand
23 of 55 users found this helpful2332
All this user's reviews
5
wendy0Mar 23, 2012
The Hunger Games = Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome with Teenagers. I'm not saying it is a bad film but much of the premise was clearly borrowed from the Mel Gibson apocalyptic trilogy of Mad Max/ The Road Warrior.
10 of 31 users found this helpful1021
All this user's reviews
10
MegWhiteleyMar 23, 2012
The Hunger Games is a fantastic movie, and the reason? The cast, the books, the story, all is amazing in the Hunger Games. The best is Jennifer Lawrence at Katniss Everdeen. I love The Hunger Games, is an amzing movie.
3 of 8 users found this helpful35
All this user's reviews
7
vernMar 23, 2012
Having read the book, I can say that this movie was a relatively loyal adaptation, andI was reasonably surprised byit.Itis true that not everything fromthe bookis captured here. But to expectthe filmmakers to translate every single pageHaving read the book, I can say that this movie was a relatively loyal adaptation, andI was reasonably surprised byit.Itis true that not everything fromthe bookis captured here. But to expectthe filmmakers to translate every single page fromthe book ontothe screen would be unfair (it's not possible). With that being said, judged onit's own terms (asintelligent, blockbuster entertainment),the film succeeds.It's fast-paced, suspenseful, emotional, and brutal whereit needs to be. Jennifer Lawrence gives a great performance as Katniss Everdeen (if any ofthe other rumored casting choices were chosen for Katniss,they would have paledin comparison to Lawrence's work here). Woody Harrelson, Stanley Tucci, Elizabeth Banks and Lenny Kravitz also give standout performances.The production designis great (futuristicinthe capitol, primalinthe arena), andthe actionis well-choreographed.The 2 hour and 20 minute running time flew by, and bythe endI was already anticipatingthe next two films. Expand
2 of 6 users found this helpful24
All this user's reviews
10
spyro123Mar 23, 2012
Hunger Games is THE must-see-movie of the year! Everything fits together perfectly - the cast, their acting, the directing...wow
Especially Jennifer Lawrence's acting is reason enough to watch, but there is so much more.
Believe me - this
Hunger Games is THE must-see-movie of the year! Everything fits together perfectly - the cast, their acting, the directing...wow
Especially Jennifer Lawrence's acting is reason enough to watch, but there is so much more.
Believe me - this movie won't disappoint anyone who loves the books. Everyone in the cinema praised this amazing masterpiece and you will be the next:)
Expand
4 of 11 users found this helpful47
All this user's reviews
10
mistiyMar 23, 2012
It was just as I had imagined. There were details left out for time purposes, maybe they will be more detailed oriented in the next two movies. Fast paced, amazing adventure. Capitol was amazing.
7 of 15 users found this helpful78
All this user's reviews
3
aszzmoMar 23, 2012
The movie was very superficial. Glossed over the backstory and pretty much all of the relationships in a rush to get to the games. Then much of the tension of the games was missing, too. Not sure I would have been able to follow if I hadn'tThe movie was very superficial. Glossed over the backstory and pretty much all of the relationships in a rush to get to the games. Then much of the tension of the games was missing, too. Not sure I would have been able to follow if I hadn't read the book. Add the "Blair Witch" camera work, and the whole experience was disappointing. Expand
11 of 24 users found this helpful1113
All this user's reviews
3
brass638Mar 23, 2012
The movie left a lot to be desired and did not do the book justice. Character development in the movie was weak and if a viewer has not read the book, the characters and their relationships with each other is shallow and confusing. ThisThe movie left a lot to be desired and did not do the book justice. Character development in the movie was weak and if a viewer has not read the book, the characters and their relationships with each other is shallow and confusing. This confusion is clear when reading reviews by people who admit to not reading the books. In particular the relationship between Catniss and her family needs to be expanded upon and built upon so we can understand the relationship between Rue and Catniss and the tragedy of the circumstances they are put into. The relationship between Peeta and Catniss is also confusing and shallow, sanitizing the internal conflict felt by them. And finally we get to Haymitch, who is a shadow of the character he was in the book. Expand
33 of 71 users found this helpful3338
All this user's reviews
3
LessMar 23, 2012
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Having read the books numerous times, the movie is lacking is so many ways. Scenes were redacted which I understand you have to keep the film lengthen under consideration but do not add scenes that have no mention or relevance into the movie. Also, the time lines are important in this film. You are building up to something. When you leave so much out how do you have that reference for later films. You do not get to connect with Katniss and Peeta in the film like you do in the books. I blame the SIGNIFICANT shortening of the cave scenes. The whole last 30 minutes of the film was horrible. Adding the extra fighting in the last scene did not add any value but took away from the film. Had the last Cornucopia scene been left as originally written, it would have made for a much more dramatic conclusion and wrap of the film. Expand
17 of 38 users found this helpful1721
All this user's reviews
5
gupet90Mar 23, 2012
I'm not really sure if i should compared the movie to the book. Because usually the movie is NEVER as good as the books are. What i really loved about the books was the "Katniss-Perspective" which the movie didn't have a ruined it quite aI'm not really sure if i should compared the movie to the book. Because usually the movie is NEVER as good as the books are. What i really loved about the books was the "Katniss-Perspective" which the movie didn't have a ruined it quite a bit. A lot of the books are about Katniss thoughts about everything and everyone around here. And the movie didn't give away that feeling at all.

And like another person wrote about the movie that i fully agree with: "The cinematography was so terrible."

The movie also skipped a lot of the book too. And i understand that it's quite hard to fit in everything.
That's why i think it would better if it was made into a TV Show like Game of Thrones instead of a movie.
Expand
3 of 15 users found this helpful312
All this user's reviews
8
Music_LiveMar 23, 2012
I saw this movie at midnight like the many others around the country and left the theater feeling pretty good. The movie presents itself as a great compliment to the first book of the trilogy. The movie used a good mix of fast paced action,I saw this movie at midnight like the many others around the country and left the theater feeling pretty good. The movie presents itself as a great compliment to the first book of the trilogy. The movie used a good mix of fast paced action, emotions, moral dilemmas, and satire and the camera work was mildly creative giving the film a more edgy feel. Though the shaky camera style doesn't sit well with others I felt it suited the atmosphere of the movie very well. The camera work deviates from mainstream films and gives us a different perspective.

The movie does a good job following the book with minimal deviations. The deviations that did occur did seem to hamper the movie. It was some of the finer details the film passed by that hurt it.

Unfortunately, because of the limits of length, the movie did not flesh out the characters as well as hoped nor was the back story laid out very well. I fear that those seeing the movie without reading the books will not appreciate everything the movie has to offer or understand it. I will say that one of the best aspects of this movie was the attention to detail in costumes, character design, and settings. The movie is great and is definitely a tribute to those who read the books first.
Expand
4 of 8 users found this helpful44
All this user's reviews
8
Sweetpea88Mar 23, 2012
I waited eagerly for this movie to come out for months, bought tickets in advance, and showed up to the midnight premier trembling with excitement, and I was not disappointed. The cinematography at the very beginning was stunning. I wasI waited eagerly for this movie to come out for months, bought tickets in advance, and showed up to the midnight premier trembling with excitement, and I was not disappointed. The cinematography at the very beginning was stunning. I was reminded of footage from the Great Depression, with the ragged children and old people, the downtrodden workers. The poverty in the districts was apparent. The movie was very tensely shot, the audience felt physically nervous when the characters did, and several of the key moments were heart-wrenching. (When Gale carries Prim away and Katniss is marched to the stage was just terrible to watch.) Cinna was absolutely masterfully done- he was a quiet, graceful, honest presence. Rue was PERFECT. They way Rue and Katniss' alliance was formed was quite masterful as well, though a bit truncated. Rue was such a lovable character though, that her death was 'toned down', probably because people don't want to see a sweet little curly headed girl be rent in half with a spear. It seemed almost too quick and they cut out most of the song. I enjoyed how they showed the uprising of district 11 ( I like to think the man who started it was Rue's father) but was disappointed that they didn't include District 11's gift. The violence over all was toned down considerably, which I expected since they wanted to keep it PG13. Mostly you saw a lot of scuffling a la "cloverfield" and then a body fell. There were a few exceptions, but mostly we just saw brief ( and I mean, a second) shots of the aftermath.

The Capitol was fairly well done- attention to detail was excellent. It appeared very ominous, with all the bright colors seeming off, the people looking frightening in their candy-colored costumes. Seneca Crane easily makes himself hated, and President Snow is like an evil Santa Claus. There is a foolish blood lust in the capitol, accentuated by Effie Trinket and her horrible comments like "You're only here for a short time but you get to enjoy yourself!" (Read: we feed you well before we kill you) Effie lacked some dimension in my opinion, though. She seemed to be soley comedic relief. Haymitch did a great job. His drunkenness was minimized, and he displayed genuine caring that wasn't seen originally in the books, but it played out well. This movie inserted lots of excellent sensory techniques to suck in the viewer. There was a high pitched buzzing after an explosion, and the familiar sound of "far away" that most people are familiar with when they are nervous. There was flashes of light and sudden swoops to indicate pain and dizziness. These little additions made the film more believable. You felt like you were there. Overall, the movie met my expectations, though, honestly, they should have just made it rated R and served into the violence like it should have been. This story isn't about violence for violence's sake, its about corruption and moral latitude. You have to see the horror to understand. It is definitely worth seeing, in fact, I saw it twice.
Expand
10 of 17 users found this helpful107
All this user's reviews
7
savannahrummelMar 23, 2012
In no way was it a masterpiece, but the Hunger Games proved itself an excitingly intense movie, led by the powerful performances from Lawrence and Hutcherson. The action was at best decent, sticking true to the book, yet not nearly as epic itIn no way was it a masterpiece, but the Hunger Games proved itself an excitingly intense movie, led by the powerful performances from Lawrence and Hutcherson. The action was at best decent, sticking true to the book, yet not nearly as epic it could be, and the cinematography was obviously purposeful, yet at times disorienting. My biggest disappointment was soundtrack. At times I felt the movie stumbled along, lacking the addicting fast pace of the book, and I feel like that may be due to the ho-hum soundtrack. There was no driving force, no beat to the film to carry the film forward, and because of that, the film suffered. Overall, I enjoyed the movie and found it worth the twelve dollars. However, I would not see it again. Expand
4 of 12 users found this helpful48
All this user's reviews
5
ripvanbuttsteakMar 23, 2012
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The movie was OKAY at best. The cinematography was so terrible that I was having motion sickness. Some of the scenes made me flat out go: â Expand
7 of 19 users found this helpful712
All this user's reviews
9
yellowprideMar 23, 2012
As someone who was a fan of the books, I was a little nervous going in to this movie. Not just because I was worried that it would be good enough, but also because first person narratives are generally harder to adapt to the screen. I wasAs someone who was a fan of the books, I was a little nervous going in to this movie. Not just because I was worried that it would be good enough, but also because first person narratives are generally harder to adapt to the screen. I was worried that the main character would lose a lot of her complexity in the translation, just because of the limitations of the medium. I'm happy to say that Jennifer Lawrence's performance absolutely proved me wrong. I think they made the character a little nicer for the movie (or, they left out some of her meaner stuff for the sake of pacing) and there were a few times where she had to have something explained to her rather than working it out herself (again, that has more to do with translating a first person narrative to screen without including a voice over), but the integrity of the character is still very much intact. Lawrence's performance was nicely understated while also selling the key emotional moments.

If I had one complaint about this movie (which I do), it's that the story probably would have been better served if they were willing to let it have an R-rating. I understand why they wouldn't want that, considering the demographic they're aiming for, but a lot of the violence of the actual Hunger Games was a little too sanitized for my taste.
Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
10
JakeIsHollywoodMar 23, 2012
I can't believe it was that good! I came out of the theater generally surprised and a little guilt-stricken for not having read any of the books. That was a choice, mind you. I will read the first book this week. I'm reading them inI can't believe it was that good! I came out of the theater generally surprised and a little guilt-stricken for not having read any of the books. That was a choice, mind you. I will read the first book this week. I'm reading them in sequential order, after I see the film based on that specific book. Anyway... It was an amazing film! The acting was impressive, all-around...including Peta. Peeta? Pita? P.E.T.A.? Yeah. That kid. He's usually is such bad movies that I have always disliked him. I don't have a gripe with any of the cast, to be honest with you. My only real problem with the film would be the camera work. It was fairly shaky at parts, especially in the first ten minutes or so. I understand using that technique for the action shots, due to budget restrictions. It's a bit odd to use them for other parts. Then again, they were trying to give District 12 (Where the main protagonists are from) a gritty/poor feeling. Without spoiling any major plot points, I'll tell you that I LOVE that feeling of heartache I got from this film, specifically toward the end. Everything else can be summed up fairly simply. The music was phenomenal; both the score and the soundtrack. James Newton Howard is a genius, as always. It's not as memorable as some of his other "hits", but still...it definitely added a lot to the film, like a score should. The script was brilliant, the pacing was perfect, and it seems like Gary Ross knows what he's doing. I cannot WAIT for the next two movies! Expand
5 of 16 users found this helpful511
All this user's reviews
8
sadransMar 23, 2012
I'm rounding up from 7.5. It about matched my expectations (which were pretty high after reading some of the reviews). And for someone who didn't read the books it left minimal questions and kept things smooth and rather exciting.
2 of 7 users found this helpful25
All this user's reviews
9
aics119Mar 23, 2012
Gary Ross did an excellent job adapting Suzanne Collin's novel. He even succeeded in explaining many of the ambiguities left by her writing. Jennifer Lawrence was excellent, as always, giving a realistic portrayal as an independent womanGary Ross did an excellent job adapting Suzanne Collin's novel. He even succeeded in explaining many of the ambiguities left by her writing. Jennifer Lawrence was excellent, as always, giving a realistic portrayal as an independent woman struggling to survive. I would recommend this movie to both fans of the series and newcomers. Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
8
MRedzuanMar 23, 2012
The Hunger Games was really better than what I'd expect. Awesome fast-paced action entertainment laced with moral dilemmas and a satire on the entertainment industry of our generation all wrapped up in a compelling story with a strongThe Hunger Games was really better than what I'd expect. Awesome fast-paced action entertainment laced with moral dilemmas and a satire on the entertainment industry of our generation all wrapped up in a compelling story with a strong emotional core. Jennifer Lawrence as Katniss Everdeen is convincing and is pitch-perfect as a strong independent protagonist with an air of vulnerability. And unlike a certain Ms Swan, she doesn't need a guy to sweep her off her feet. The ensemble cast is perfectly casted, from Woody Harrelson to Stanley Tucci. Don't worry about whether this'll turn out like Twilight because it's not. There's no sappy love story here. When the games begin, her only concern is to stay alive and even when she does show affection it's all part of the game.

Can't speak for the readers who'd want every single detail from the book done right but keep in mind that the screenplay was co-written by Suzanne Collins. If The Hunger Games is just a little taste or preview for what's to come in the cinemas this year than it'll be a good 2012. It's definitely worth the money to watch and will watch it again in another preferred format.
Expand
9 of 18 users found this helpful99
All this user's reviews