The Hunger Games

The Hunger Games is an adaptation of the first of three novels in a series of science fiction books. I have not read the books, but I do know that, like Harry Potter and Twilight before them, they are feverishly popular among young readers. And for a movie created with the express intent of suckering those readers out of billions of dollars worth of their parent’s money, The Hunger Games isn’t half-bad. Which isn’t to say that it’s great. The script presents us with some interesting ideas but doesn’t really engage them, the conclusion is foregone long before the last reel starts to run, and there’s a general sense that some particulars got lost in the transition from page to screen. Still, the movie is a deftly directly, well-acted popcorn flick that bodes well for the future.

The world of The Hunger Games, like so many sci-fi worlds before it, is a bleak one. Our heroine, Katmiss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence), lives in District 12, an impoverished, powerless satellite state ruled over with an iron fist from the glitteringly wealthy Capitol City. Every year, each of the twelve Districts must offer up one girl and one boy to participate in the Hunger Games, a televised battle to the death organized by the Capitol to remind the outlying Districts just who’s ruling and who’s being ruled. For a movie aimed mainly at the 12-16 crowd, the whole concept strikes me as pretty ballsy, and the movie shows some follow-through by pushing the edges of its PG-13 rating. Even though director Gary Ross leaves the gorier details to our imaginations, this is still a movie where teenagers get stabbed, sliced, and shot to death.

With an interesting premise and the conviction to see it through, The Hunger Games seems poised to turn into something special, and at times it almost does. In a plea to save her little sister from participation, Katmiss volunteers to represent District 12 in this year’s Hunger Games (the 74th annual, for those counting). She and fellow District 12 denizen Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutcherson) are whisked away to the Capitol where they’re told that winning the Hunger Games isn’t just about survival of the fittest; you also have to be liked by the viewing public. The period leading up to the games takes up a surprisingly large chuck of time, and it’s there that the movie is at its best. There are all kinds of parallels, whether intentional or not, drawn between this society and our own. The Hunger Games as a monstrous outgrowth of reality television, the cruel, dandified Capitol dwellers as representative of today’s upper class, and so on. When the actual Hunger Games started up, I found myself wanting to know more about what was happening behind the scenes, more about the public’s reaction, and more about the reasons why this ritual had lasted so long in the first place.

Part of the problem is that we know next to nothing about most of the contestants. We know Katmiss. She’s level-headed, good with a bow, and tough under pressure. Jennifer Lawrence gives a consistent, likable performance that goes a long way toward keeping the movie grounded; that the Hunger Games segments of The Hunger Games are compelling at all is due mostly to her. Peeta gets some screen time but never makes much of an impact; he’s the kind of blandly handsome, non-threatening male lead sure to enrapture tween girls but who doesn’t really stand out to the rest of us. And the rest are a wash. A couple of the contestants are sadistic jackasses, and to say that they die unpleasantly after doing less harm than you might expect should come as no surprise. Mostly the combatants just die off namelessly one by one by one. This comparison has been made before, but it really is borne out: the back half of The Hunger Games plays out like a less exciting version of the Japanese action flick Battle Royale.

In the movie’s defense, I suspect that fans of the book will enjoy these parts more than I did. There are a number of bit players, such as Hunger Games producer Seneca Crane (Wes Bentley) and State stylist Cinna (Lenny Kravitz, for some reason) who felt a bit extraneous from the main action but who I figured had deeper and denser roles in the book. The scope of the movie is quite vast, and it stands to reason that some subtleties got lost in translation. Also, there’s the probability that many members of this gang will get greater development come the sequels, the prospect of which I’m sure has already set Hollywood producers to drooling. I say let them have their fun. The world of The Hunger Games is probably interesting enough to be worth a second visit, and if the filmmakers augment their able workmanship with a touch more daring the trip could be something special indeed.