I think the films though overall better paced than the books were limited by the conventions of blockbusters. What I admire about the books was that Suzanne Collins wasn’t afraid to depict harsh consequences and a society inevitably repeating its mistakes, even if that isn’t crowd pleasing. Not many other YA writers would have the guts to end the heroines arc with PTSD for life and children she doesn’t want.
Yeah but what you've got to remember is that books don't have age restrictions, films do. So they aren't going to cut off what they perceive to be their target audience that are able to read the books.
i completely agree, i went into the screening feeling pretty confident i'd thoroughly enjoy it...but after watching battle royal only a few days before i watched the hunger games (im sorry for the comparison i know haha) the hunger games just seemed a little contrived...and as you say, heavy handed and slightly lacking in substance... and MY GOD,...CAMERA WOBBLE!!! it was like watching a Bourne Identity fight scene for 110 minutes....
Genuinely interested to see what you thought of Prometheus. I was mildly entertained at first, then really really bored. It was pretty to look at though.
most people watch movies like they watch firework displays (IE with no regard for anything but the most superficial spectacle aspect of what they’re seeing), that’s why crap gets popular
Saddened to see that this film didn't get into the good Doctors top ten. In the same way he chose Inception as the best film of the year for being an intelligent blockbuster, so does The Hunger Games prove that the ostensible 'teenage' demographic (very cynically associated with the Twilight franchise) are capable of enjoying and appreciating this highly challenging, satirical , heart thumping work of cinema with the strongest sci fi female lead since ripely.
What's this constant need for violence to be prominent in these films? Too much violence can just cheapen it. Battle Royale had so much violence in it that you just become numb to it and it starts to look a bit silly after a while. This takes building up the characters and the relationships between all the participants in place of the violence. The violence is definitely there, it's just not in your face and obnoxious about it, it's subtle. The less you see the more think. Much like The original Texas Chainsaw Massacre. A film built on atmosphere and the thought of violent acts, without actually showing them. I thought i wouldn't really enjoy this, but it's one of my favourite films now.
Personally I think I'll wait for the DVD. I have not read the books and don't know if I am a bit old for the target demographic. However I do like Jennifer Lawrence and I think she is a good actress.
funny how your username is Transformers2, I take it that masterpiece is up there with Clockwork Orange and Blade Runner and Spartacus? Oh of course, my mistake, it's the irony of it, is it? I'm glad you're sooo original.
The film is strongly intriguing, action packed, stylish, effective & is better then The Divergent (2014-2016) series & The Maze Runner (2014, 2015 & 2018) series. (90%) (4.5/5 stars) (positive)
How is this like Twilight? The only thing they have in common is their audience and a love triangle. That's it. You probably decided it was shite when you heard teenagers liked it.
it wasnt that good was it? i mean i tried to make me feel a certain way, but it failed because the film was too scared show how dangerous the hunger games was, i mean its no saving private ryan that shows war is bad, with a guy walking with his blown off arm in is hand, and battleroyale does this by testing out the collars and showing Takeshi's colours. so i didnt feel too involved, it just seemed like a walk in the park
I like Alien too. I admire Blade Runner more than I like it. American Gangster was awesome. And Someone to Watch Over Me was as good as a silly 80s cop thriller can be. So I actually don't hate Ridley Scott. As for Mr Kubrick, while I generally don't like his later work (but 2001 is my favorite of all time) that post I wrote was largely a troll-post, as your username is trollbait. So I'm not above your tactics. All's well that ends well: Kubrick was a genius, Scott is talented. And that's that.
great cast, good acting, sadly only about 15 minutes of the 2 hrs. can be seen due to the overdone shaking camera and blurriness it looks like it was done by taping camera phones to a cat and making them run around in circles. the theater was packed and everyone left complaining about the close ups.
At least the film is saying something about the world and about where it could well go if we are not careful. Twilight, well, that is just chewing gum for the eyes, a waste of time and film stock! Jenny Lawrence is beautiful too and she can sure play!
it annoyed me that at the start of the film you were set the rules, then for no reason there is some truman show style controllers that can set fire to things and send out bad CGI rendered dog things at will, very frustrating
Thing of it is, I've just check the start of your argument, and noticed that you wrote that you're 15. Oh. I thought you were older. Not because you have at any point demonstrated any wit, wisdom or insight in any single thing you wrote. No. But because on your channel profile you describe your occupation as "student". Here in the UK that generally means 18 or above, I forgot in America it also means high school age. Things make sense now. When I was 15, I was also a Ridley Scott fan. Never mind
I am a middle-aged man who read the book on urging of my wife and despite a few weaknesses found the book to be quite a fun read. The movie....was just plain crap by comparison. None of the political themes are hit strongly hit on, the character motivations are left vapid & empty, & the missed opportunities are so frustrating I almost found myself yelling at the screen. If you hadn't read the book, I can see the movies as being OK, but I can't understand those who read the book liking this
Yes I dismiss fine, It's like typing to thick wall. I find it amazing people like you can like anything, you remind me of people that hate/call movies crap because there is an actor in it you don't like completely ignoring the effort put in by others on the film. The book could be the second coming of christ and if I read it I could love it. But unlike you I'm not going to get angry and claim a film is shit due to it being a rip off, why the director, actors etc didn't say let's rip off 'blah'.
I was really interested in seeing THG, massive sci-fi fan. I hadn't heard of the books at all so I saw it knowing nothing other than what was in the trailer. Unfortunately I didn't engage with it much. I thought it was too long and I wasn't interested in the love triangle. I also couldn't get past the fact that it's nowhere near as edgy [and actually funny] as Battle Royale. I definitely believe that the film isn't trying to be BR but I couldn't help but compare the two.... :)
Micheal Bay, put effort into his films.... REALLY!!!!? Seriously though Kermode does that he does the same to Zach Snyder, and other directors without giving them a chance to suprise him. I went seeing After Earth to see if M.S. has made a good film, he didn't but I gave it a chance. As for this arguement I'm done it was fun. Ignoring the achievements of a film, based on one criticism is truly annoying, partially why I like Kermode is he often not always approachs movies objectively.
agree with you regarding my equally lack of understanding of Mark´s love for Twilight...and actually i tend to think that the same reasons he praises them are used often by himself to trash other films..utter utter rubbish. Can´t agree with you on Ridley Scott topic though...loved Gladiator and Prometheus looks stunning....
I was just kinda bored. Not a bad movie by any stretch, just a little dull. A mis-match of 1984 distopian future, battle royale teen-violence amongst other things. and there were just a lot of bits that made me scratch my head. When did that guy have the time to totally camouflage himself? where were his tools? stuff like that
Unlike you, I don't believe that the CZcams comments section is for spamming-up with my precious opinions, so I state my beliefs simply. Mind you, on two occasions I asked you to send me a detailed PM on why ACO is so great. But you didn't. Because you can't. You can only insult people cheaply, and run away. And I used the word "gots" once as a joke. Your username is a joke, or "trollbait", and you carry it around with you every day, and insult those who call you on it. There's a big difference
So I have to turn in my grown-up-card because I occasionally enjoy media primarily targeted at younger audiences. Damn! Why can't I be such a mature, confident adult like you? OH WAIT.
Saw it last night and found it very average. The very situation itself seems badly conceived. There was a rebellion and so now we choose a child from each of the districts to fight to the death on a television show. This ensures we don't repeat the errors or our past - WTF No sense of threat, poor realisation of the future dystopia, characters poorly developed. Just didn't work as a 2 hour movie for me - love Jennifer Lawrence though, she made it bearable.
So something is bad because it's a rip of and not the original... Then I guess every film, book etc ever made must be crap seeing as they all draw influences ie. riping off, from over works. Sigh, that reasoning is CRAP, if you don't like a film thats fine but not liking a film by judging it source material is pointless. Many directors take sub par source material or plagerised material and made superb movies, not saying The Hunger Games is a superb film but Jeniffer Lawrence is its saving grace
The movie I felt was a lot better than the book which I honestly thought was mediocre. I wasn't crazy about the characters, the movie villainizes the Capital to such a ridiculous end and lack the gifts of subtlety, the cinematography was shit, and some of the themes were dumbed down or highlighted in other areas. Although, I LOVED the setting of this movie, the casting/acting was spot on, and it had some good pacing. All in all, a guilty pleasure.
Its not intense, its not disturbing, the censors kill any prospect of suspense, I watched it last night, this was my impression, first hour is the X Factor (which your removed from because you don't care) second hour she sits in a tree for 10 minutes then comes down from the tree and runs and runs, all in all I've had more entertainment and suspense watching ice cream melt.
"The movie was shite. Unless you're 13 and like twilight" Would you like to... back up that claim? Coz I'm not 13, and I *really* don't like Twillight, but I enjoyed THG quite a bit.
With that reasoning, any movie can be good. Go watch disaster movie with an open mind, watch it as the target audience and try to enjoy it. Go watch literally any Michael Bay movie with an open mind, they rake in a shit-ton of money. By your reasoning they couldn't have done well if no-one liked them, therefore they couldn't have been terrible; except they're fucking awful. Your reasoning makes no sense. Just because loads of people like something doesn't make it good. The movie was shit.
I'm not saying they all goodfellas but he puts effort into them and they're more original than the hunger games. What not respecting a film because its a total rip off is bad? I saw the and i just didn't like it, thats why i don't like it, it's shit
Of course Ridley Scott has made a couple of classics and one or two gems. But he's also made a lot of uninspired, useless and boring travesties (in particular his recent Robin Hood joke). And his whole style of filmmaking is oddly clinical and humourless. I can admit that practically all of his films are aesthetically impressive, but that's perhaps down to his background in advertising; his feature films, for me, tend not to have much more depth than the average advert. I actually prefer Tony...
The movie was shite. Unless you're 13 and like twilight, avoid it. Then again, Kermode gets half a chub when you mention twilight for some reason beyond comprehension. Other than Chrisopher Nolan movies, it is my fervent opinion that the blockbuster movie is rotting from the core. The classic blockbuster directors are either dead or may as well be. Still unconvinced about Prometheus though, as Ridley Scott directed nothing noteworthy since Thelma and Louise.
You're the one who does the most mocking, comrade. Read over YOUR comments directed at any other CZcams user and you'll find plenty of mockery there. Look, seriously, I honestly want to say: tone down the "You're an idiot if you don't like the same films I do" and perhaps lose the "I am an aspiring filmmaker and budding artist, which makes my opinions more valid than your's, you common factory toiler", and you will come across as far less obnoxious and far more reasonable and interesting. Okay?
Kermode has a teenage daughter, that's why. I've lost some respect for him actually. He completely trashed films like 300 and the Tranformers which were targeted at teenage boys, while he's more generous on films targeted at teenage girls.....
I'm 56 and remember having 'Lord of the flys' being read in English classes in school in the early 80's
I found twilight a bit boring but hunger games was awesome. Entirely different and incomparable franchises.
I think the films though overall better paced than the books were limited by the conventions of blockbusters. What I admire about the books was that Suzanne Collins wasn’t afraid to depict harsh consequences and a society inevitably repeating its mistakes, even if that isn’t crowd pleasing. Not many other YA writers would have the guts to end the heroines arc with PTSD for life and children she doesn’t want.
When someone described 'Hunger Games' to me, I immediately said "that's Battle Royale meets Running Man".
Pretty much
what's wrong with Pan's Labyrinth? It was a masterpiece. Also Mark wasn't the only critic who raved about it.
Yeah but what you've got to remember is that books don't have age restrictions, films do. So they aren't going to cut off what they perceive to be their target audience that are able to read the books.
Ditto! Everything I hear/read all denotes that its aimed at teens.
i completely agree, i went into the screening feeling pretty confident i'd thoroughly enjoy it...but after watching battle royal only a few days before i watched the hunger games (im sorry for the comparison i know haha) the hunger games just seemed a little contrived...and as you say, heavy handed and slightly lacking in substance... and MY GOD,...CAMERA WOBBLE!!! it was like watching a Bourne Identity fight scene for 110 minutes....
Genuinely interested to see what you thought of Prometheus. I was mildly entertained at first, then really really bored. It was pretty to look at though.
most people watch movies like they watch firework displays (IE with no regard for anything but the most superficial spectacle aspect of what they’re seeing), that’s why crap gets popular
255ad kindah agree.
I thought it was quite good.
Does Mark know that more people are connecting this movie to Battle Royale?
I agree with cartman..they seem to have stopped putting up the vidcasts quite a while back ... and I love a good Kermode fix. Cheers.
Saddened to see that this film didn't get into the good Doctors top ten. In the same way he chose Inception as the best film of the year for being an intelligent blockbuster, so does The Hunger Games prove that the ostensible 'teenage' demographic (very cynically associated with the Twilight franchise) are capable of enjoying and appreciating this highly challenging, satirical , heart thumping work of cinema with the strongest sci fi female lead since ripely.
I definitely jonesing to see it now. Thought it was another twilight poopy. Everyone's raving about it!
When is the podcast availa...?
I came in with no expectations and having not read the book, I thought it was brilliant and excellently subversive
Interesting that those of us betwixt young teenagers and old wrinklies were completely overlooked in the target audience comments.
WHOOPS!!! I commented too early before he mentioned Battle Royale!
What's this constant need for violence to be prominent in these films? Too much violence can just cheapen it. Battle Royale had so much violence in it that you just become numb to it and it starts to look a bit silly after a while. This takes building up the characters and the relationships between all the participants in place of the violence. The violence is definitely there, it's just not in your face and obnoxious about it, it's subtle. The less you see the more think. Much like The original Texas Chainsaw Massacre. A film built on atmosphere and the thought of violent acts, without actually showing them. I thought i wouldn't really enjoy this, but it's one of my favourite films now.
Teddy5691 A game based on killing will be violent. sorry
Personally I think I'll wait for the DVD. I have not read the books and don't know if I am a bit old for the target demographic. However I do like Jennifer Lawrence and I think she is a good actress.
It's a shame they couldn't make this movie rated R it would for sure be a deeper experience
It was ok but it was no Running Man.
Who do you love and who lives you?!
funny how your username is Transformers2, I take it that masterpiece is up there with Clockwork Orange and Blade Runner and Spartacus? Oh of course, my mistake, it's the irony of it, is it? I'm glad you're sooo original.
The film is strongly intriguing, action packed, stylish, effective & is better then The Divergent (2014-2016) series & The Maze Runner (2014, 2015 & 2018) series. (90%) (4.5/5 stars) (positive)
Tony drinks far too much coffee.
@Mark Hayden: I agree
......man bites dog...... the memories,,,,,,,
Yeah man I completely agree. We needed more blood and gore and way less fucking shakey cam.
I'm 23, I hate Twilight and I loved the Hunger Games. You are totally right
I love it when people don't understand the difference between "I didn't like the movie." and "The movie was shite."
Well if you're over 13 and you like this, you're the who needs to explain himself
How is this like Twilight? The only thing they have in common is their audience and a love triangle. That's it. You probably decided it was shite when you heard teenagers liked it.
it wasnt that good was it? i mean i tried to make me feel a certain way, but it failed because the film was too scared show how dangerous the hunger games was, i mean its no saving private ryan that shows war is bad, with a guy walking with his blown off arm in is hand, and battleroyale does this by testing out the collars and showing Takeshi's colours. so i didnt feel too involved, it just seemed like a walk in the park
I like Alien too. I admire Blade Runner more than I like it.
American Gangster was awesome. And Someone to Watch Over Me was as good as a silly 80s cop thriller can be. So I actually don't hate Ridley Scott.
As for Mr Kubrick, while I generally don't like his later work (but 2001 is my favorite of all time) that post I wrote was largely a troll-post, as your username is trollbait. So I'm not above your tactics.
All's well that ends well: Kubrick was a genius, Scott is talented.
And that's that.
great cast, good acting, sadly only about 15 minutes of the 2 hrs. can be seen due to the overdone shaking camera and blurriness it looks like it was done by taping camera phones to a cat and making them run around in circles.
the theater was packed and everyone left complaining about the close ups.
At least the film is saying something about the world and about where it could well go if we are not careful. Twilight, well, that is just chewing gum for the eyes, a waste of time and film stock! Jenny Lawrence is beautiful too and she can sure play!
Eli Porter
Hahahaha!!! Pan's labia
I know you didn't mean it its just funny is all.
Battle Royale's good. Mostly.
it annoyed me that at the start of the film you were set the rules, then for no reason there is some truman show style controllers that can set fire to things and send out bad CGI rendered dog things at will, very frustrating
i take you like the video then hahaha
Thing of it is, I've just check the start of your argument, and noticed that you wrote that you're 15. Oh. I thought you were older.
Not because you have at any point demonstrated any wit, wisdom or insight in any single thing you wrote. No.
But because on your channel profile you describe your occupation as "student". Here in the UK that generally means 18 or above, I forgot in America it also means high school age.
Things make sense now. When I was 15, I was also a Ridley Scott fan.
Never mind
I am a middle-aged man who read the book on urging of my wife and despite a few weaknesses found the book to be quite a fun read. The movie....was just plain crap by comparison. None of the political themes are hit strongly hit on, the character motivations are left vapid & empty, & the missed opportunities are so frustrating I almost found myself yelling at the screen.
If you hadn't read the book, I can see the movies as being OK, but I can't understand those who read the book liking this
Yes I dismiss fine, It's like typing to thick wall. I find it amazing people like you can like anything, you remind me of people that hate/call movies crap because there is an actor in it you don't like completely ignoring the effort put in by others on the film. The book could be the second coming of christ and if I read it I could love it. But unlike you I'm not going to get angry and claim a film is shit due to it being a rip off, why the director, actors etc didn't say let's rip off 'blah'.
Why was this just like twillight and why can't anyone above the age of 13 can't enjoy it?!
Your are wrong about 2 things.
I was really interested in seeing THG, massive sci-fi fan. I hadn't heard of the books at all so I saw it knowing nothing other than what was in the trailer. Unfortunately I didn't engage with it much. I thought it was too long and I wasn't interested in the love triangle.
I also couldn't get past the fact that it's nowhere near as edgy [and actually funny] as Battle Royale. I definitely believe that the film isn't trying to be BR but I couldn't help but compare the two....
:)
its the rules round here pal....Harry Potter is fine alright its original and didn't rip off a Japanese novel
Micheal Bay, put effort into his films.... REALLY!!!!? Seriously though Kermode does that he does the same to Zach Snyder, and other directors without giving them a chance to suprise him. I went seeing After Earth to see if M.S. has made a good film, he didn't but I gave it a chance. As for this arguement I'm done it was fun. Ignoring the achievements of a film, based on one criticism is truly annoying, partially why I like Kermode is he often not always approachs movies objectively.
agree with you regarding my equally lack of understanding of Mark´s love for Twilight...and actually i tend to think that the same reasons he praises them are used often by himself to trash other films..utter utter rubbish.
Can´t agree with you on Ridley Scott topic though...loved Gladiator and Prometheus looks stunning....
I was just kinda bored. Not a bad movie by any stretch, just a little dull. A mis-match of 1984 distopian future, battle royale teen-violence amongst other things.
and there were just a lot of bits that made me scratch my head. When did that guy have the time to totally camouflage himself? where were his tools? stuff like that
Unlike you, I don't believe that the CZcams comments section is for spamming-up with my precious opinions, so I state my beliefs simply.
Mind you, on two occasions I asked you to send me a detailed PM on why ACO is so great. But you didn't. Because you can't. You can only insult people cheaply, and run away.
And I used the word "gots" once as a joke. Your username is a joke, or "trollbait", and you carry it around with you every day, and insult those who call you on it. There's a big difference
So I have to turn in my grown-up-card because I occasionally enjoy media primarily targeted at younger audiences. Damn! Why can't I be such a mature, confident adult like you?
OH WAIT.
Saw it last night and found it very average. The very situation itself seems badly conceived. There was a rebellion and so now we choose a child from each of the districts to fight to the death on a television show. This ensures we don't repeat the errors or our past - WTF
No sense of threat, poor realisation of the future dystopia, characters poorly developed. Just didn't work as a 2 hour movie for me - love Jennifer Lawrence though, she made it bearable.
So something is bad because it's a rip of and not the original... Then I guess every film, book etc ever made must be crap seeing as they all draw influences ie. riping off, from over works. Sigh, that reasoning is CRAP, if you don't like a film thats fine but not liking a film by judging it source material is pointless. Many directors take sub par source material or plagerised material and made superb movies, not saying The Hunger Games is a superb film but Jeniffer Lawrence is its saving grace
I guess mark kermode has a little pretentious mini me for a daughter
The movie I felt was a lot better than the book which I honestly thought was mediocre. I wasn't crazy about the characters, the movie villainizes the Capital to such a ridiculous end and lack the gifts of subtlety, the cinematography was shit, and some of the themes were dumbed down or highlighted in other areas. Although, I LOVED the setting of this movie, the casting/acting was spot on, and it had some good pacing. All in all, a guilty pleasure.
Talented don't cover it.
Its not intense, its not disturbing, the censors kill any prospect of suspense, I watched it last night, this was my impression, first hour is the X Factor (which your removed from because you don't care) second hour she sits in a tree for 10 minutes then comes down from the tree and runs and runs, all in all I've had more entertainment and suspense watching ice cream melt.
"The movie was shite. Unless you're 13 and like twilight"
Would you like to... back up that claim? Coz I'm not 13, and I *really* don't like Twillight, but I enjoyed THG quite a bit.
With that reasoning, any movie can be good. Go watch disaster movie with an open mind, watch it as the target audience and try to enjoy it.
Go watch literally any Michael Bay movie with an open mind, they rake in a shit-ton of money. By your reasoning they couldn't have done well if no-one liked them, therefore they couldn't have been terrible; except they're fucking awful. Your reasoning makes no sense. Just because loads of people like something doesn't make it good. The movie was shit.
I'm not saying they all goodfellas but he puts effort into them and they're more original than the hunger games. What not respecting a film because its a total rip off is bad? I saw the and i just didn't like it, thats why i don't like it, it's shit
Doesn't matter. The Hunger Games is just a ripoff of Battle Royale anyway.
Yes if there is film that is a total rip off in my book its shit. Its not influenced by its ripped off totally, and people like you just dismiss it.
i was looking forward to this movie but it was shit
I thought it was rubbish to be honest...
Of course Ridley Scott has made a couple of classics and one or two gems. But he's also made a lot of uninspired, useless and boring travesties (in particular his recent Robin Hood joke).
And his whole style of filmmaking is oddly clinical and humourless.
I can admit that practically all of his films are aesthetically impressive, but that's perhaps down to his background in advertising; his feature films, for me, tend not to have much more depth than the average advert.
I actually prefer Tony...
The movie was shite. Unless you're 13 and like twilight, avoid it. Then again, Kermode gets half a chub when you mention twilight for some reason beyond comprehension.
Other than Chrisopher Nolan movies, it is my fervent opinion that the blockbuster movie is rotting from the core. The classic blockbuster directors are either dead or may as well be. Still unconvinced about Prometheus though, as Ridley Scott directed nothing noteworthy since Thelma and Louise.
this is nothing like twilight. plus chistopher noland is over rated. the batman films he made are really boring
You're the one who does the most mocking, comrade. Read over YOUR comments directed at any other CZcams user and you'll find plenty of mockery there.
Look, seriously, I honestly want to say: tone down the "You're an idiot if you don't like the same films I do" and perhaps lose the "I am an aspiring filmmaker and budding artist, which makes my opinions more valid than your's, you common factory toiler", and you will come across as far less obnoxious and far more reasonable and interesting. Okay?
it was terrible, I hated it throughout
least battle royale was entertaining for what it was, whether that's your thing or not. hunger games was typical crap
ban this movie!
This movie sucked ass. Such a disappointment. Love the book.
How ludicrously pretentious.
Hunger games is a disgusting exploitation film that has movie goers pay money to see teenagers kill each other.
How is nobody talking about that?
omgsolikevalleygirl so what makes it “disgusting” or “exploitation”, just curious?
Kermode has a teenage daughter, that's why. I've lost some respect for him actually. He completely trashed films like 300 and the Tranformers which were targeted at teenage boys, while he's more generous on films targeted at teenage girls.....
Danbo lol I don't know why I found this comment funny.
My Little Eye is a film Mark should have mentioned. TV is dying and this film is dog crap.