The Hunger Games (2012)

Okay, this is supposedly the moment wherein I gush about this movie because as I recall, I couldn't wait to watch it. However, (wait, don't think of the worst) I don't think I should feel that way. It would definitely cloud my judgement in assessing the movie. Or maybe it's just an excuse for not being satisfied by the entirety of the movie. Or maybe I'm too nervous to love this movie, because let's face it, I freaking love this movie, for fear of disappointment for the remaining two installments. Don't get me wrong, compared to other teen-oriented film franchises--ehem, Twilight--this is absolutely much better and dare I say, more relevant. It's based on Suzanne Collins' widely popular The Hunger Games trilogy novel and directed by Gary Ross. For those who haven't read the books, here's the gist: North America was destroyed and was replaced by Panem, wherein The Capitol serves as the "capital city" which is the powerhouse all over the nation. There are 12 Districts that surrounds it and they rebelled once. They weren't successful. So as a sign of punishment and ultimate power, The Capitol hosts an annual event called the Hunger Games wherein one boy and one girl (called Tributes) would represent each of the 12 Districts. They then have to kill each other in an arena until a lone winner emerges. The winner will be awarded with richness together with the district he or she is representing.


Pretty simple, huh? In fact, if you've seen Japan's version of this called Battle Royale, then you know almost everything. So what's so different about The Hunger Games? Well, not much really. Both embody modern-day gladiators. Both show the great influence of media in the lives of people. Both acknowledge the urgency of one's survival when faced with scarcity and fear. Most especially, both show violence. Maybe the most important difference is the protagonist, Katniss Everdeen, who volunteered to be a Tribute as a replacement for her much younger sister, Primrose. She is the ultimate underdog, coming from District 12, one of the poorest Districts. Jennifer Lawrence as Katniss is perfect. She embodies Katniss who is brave, resolute, easy to provoke and by all means, imperfect. She compliments her counterpart, Peeta Mellark, the boy representing District 12. He is sweet, hopeless but surprisingly crafty. I thank Suzanne Collins for choosing Josh Hutcherson. He is as charming and as commanding as what the books describe Peeta to be. Other characters were excellent choices such as Stanley Tucci as Caesar Flickerman, Wes Bentley as the game master Seneca Crane, Lenny Kravitz as Katniss' stylist, Cinna who eventually became a good friend of hers, and Elizabeth Banks as the extravagant Effie Trinket.

Unlike in the books wherein the story is told through Katniss' point of view, the movie shows us what's going on outside the arena. This is a good idea as being faithful with the books would limit us, the audience, from what we like most, which is the thrill of the action. At the arena, we clearly see that the fittest does not always survive and sometimes, it requires a little bit of luck and a clear reason to live. As a nation, we see that Panem may be ruled by tyranny, but oppression makes people angry and when pushed, people may act. And act some more. We will be seeing more of that in the succeeding sequels. I do not agree with those who say that the movie did not give justice to the book. It did give justice and in fact, we should not compare the entirety of both the movie and the book with each other. The story was intact, the characters were given life by more than adequate actors, the places were embodied perfectly and the social issues tackled in the book were present in the movie. I say I was pretty happy and contented upon exiting the movie theater. Cheerios!