The Hunger Games (2012)

The Hunger Games Review
Review #148

3.5/5 stars

Director – Gary Ross

Cast – Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, Liam Hemsworth, Woody Harrelson, Elizabeth Banks, Lenny Kravitz, Stanley Tucci, Donald Sutherland, Wes Bentley, Toby Jones, Alexander Ludwig, Isabelle Fuhrman, Amandla Stenberg

——————–

I watched The Hunger Games with the same enjoyment with which I would eat a hotdog. It was fun, a little meaty, but probably would have been a lot more enjoyable if I was ten years younger.

Based on the best-selling young adult novel by Suzanne Collins, The Hunger Games is set in a slightly dystopian future, where all twelve “districts” of a future nation (implied to be America) are required to sacrifice two “tributes” each year to fight in a televised fight-to-the-death. The tributes are to be between the ages of 12 and 18. The winner’s district apparently receives extra food, though I was a bit blurry on this point. Tributes are lauded and celebrated as celebrities, the survivor more so. They are built up in the public eye through media events, they seek sponsors, and train for a brief period of time before set loose in a large forest. The forest’s edges are cordoned off, and a laser-like dome/grid covers the whole area, as the Game Master monitors (and occasionally interferes with) the game. The main characters, Katniss (female) and Peta (male), are from a poor district. While Katniss is an excellent shot with a bow and has good survival skills, Peta is without a doubt in over his head. It was good to see that reversal of the usual gender dynamics.

I must admit that the tributes age took me aback a little, once they, you know, started slicing at each other with swords. Even within the group, it was a little bit disturbing to see a large, muscular 18-year-old hacking away at a young nerdy looking kid. Nothing was explicit, to be sure, but perhaps that makes it worse. It was very effective, which was good… I guess. It would have been easier if I could accept the premise that a society would both permit and even flock to such a gruesome spectacle. The vague explanation about “keeping the border districts in line” just didn’t really fly with me… I think as a younger person it would have gone down easier, they would accept the premise quicker. Seeing people your own age get cut down has a different effect. That’s something of a youthful fantasy as well, finding yourself alone against the odds, fighting to the death. Those questions didn’t quite leave the back of my mind, but the movie is not really aimed at me. It is targeted at teens who have read the Hunger Games trilogy. They will get more from it.

All this is not to say that the movie is not solid. It is very well made, and even has some sly little things to say about celebrity, pop culture, and reality TV. The beginning is especially engrossing, but once we reach the capital city to be prepped for the games, the movies start to drag slightly.

The final third of the movie consists of the game itself, and drags a bit as well. When action scenes do happen though, they are brutal and merciless, if a bit too “shaky-cam”. These kids mean to kill, and they are as brutal as the society that forces them to. I just wish that perhaps the movie had been as brutal with the targets of its satire. I love it when reality TV gets a little poke!

OVERALL

The Hunger Games is a solid and respectful film. It is a bit too long, but is impressive when it counts, and is anchored by excellent performances, both from the younger ones (like Jennifer Lawrence and Josh Hutcherson) and the veterans (Stanley Tucci and Donald Sutherland, etc.). Tucci looks like he is having a ball here, and I have yet to see Woody Harrelson give a bad performance. He’s a joy to watch.

So, while readers of the books may get a bit more out of it, this is a solid movie that is rightfully managing to attract a large audience. Certainly worth your time, but don’t be expecting anything revolutionary. Just sit back and enjoy.

——————–

TRAILER

“The Hunger Games” on other websites:

IMDB —– Rotten Tomatoes —– Wikipedia

——————–

85 – The Devil Wears Prada (2006)

The Devil Wears Prada REVIEW

4/5 stars

Director – David Frankel

Cast – Meryll Streep, Anne Hathaway, Emily Blunt, Stabnley Tucci, Simon Baker, Adrian Grenier

——————–

The Devil Wears Prada is based on the best-selling book of the same name by Lauren Weisberger, who allegedly based the  book on her experiences as an assistant to fashion icon Anna Wintour (nicknamed “Nuclear Wintour”, which says it all I think.) It follows a young assistant to a fashion magazine editor as she learns the ropes and tries not to lose herself along the way etc etc.

The movie is one big ball of cotton candy, and as such, even though the nutritional content is next to nothing, it is quite enjoyable. The movie hums along at a nice pace, with a rich and frothy tone that can’t help but be appealing, no matter how hard you try to not be affected by its infectious bounce.

The cast is a big reason for its appeal. Anne Hathaway is impossible not to like, and Stanley Tucci is wonderful (as usual). However Emily Blunt and Meryl Streep really are the bright lights in the production, with Meryl providing most of what little complexity there is in the film, and Emily Blunt being quite funny in a dark sort of way.

After watching The Devil Wears Prada many may realize that it is quite hypocritical in a way. It’s core “message” (if it may be said to have one) is all about being true to yourself, and avoiding the follies and fakeness which the fashion industry represents. However the movie itself takes every opportunity it can to glamorize the clothes and fashion of that world. Many major fashion designers took part in the film, to the extent that it became the most expensively costumed movie in history. How can we be expected to follow the themes of the film when it contradicts itself like this, you might ask. To be frank, the viewer is swept along at such an entertaining and brisk rate that these objections fly out of the window with the arrival of the next scene, montage, or character entrance. Its fluff to be sure , but it’s fairly entertaining fluff all the same.

OVERALL

The Devil Wears Prada is fast, fun, and even witty at times. Granted, it can hit a cliché or two, but the pace and wonderful performances will keep the audience interested. Meryl Streep, Anne Hathaway, Stanley Tucci, and Emily Blunt all bring their A game. Despite its paper-thin plot, The Devil Wears Prada remains a solidly entertaining movie.

——————–

TRAILER

“The Devil Wears Prada” on other websites:

IMDB —– Rotten Tomatoes —– Wikipedia

——————–