"The world will be watching"

Rating: 8/10 (26 March 2012)

Set in a future where the Capitol selects a boy and girl from the twelve districts to fight to the death on live television, Katniss Everdeen volunteers to take her younger sister's place for the latest match.
The movie was fantastic, truly. If you've seen the Harry Potter films or even (gag) the Twilight series, they do not stay true to their source material. This movie adaptation was definitely the best, and here's why... If you've seen (again) the above movies, or even more, the directors add pointless stuff, even removing your favorite parts. Hunger Games surely is to blame for this, as any other; but thing is, they add things that actually WORK and remove things that wasn't even needed in the first place. Sure, there was a few flaws in this department, but overall I congratulate the filmmakers for making this work, unlike other films... The acting in this film was incredible. This is the first movie I've seen with Jennifer Lawrence and she did a beautiful job. She clearly plays a very subtle way but, if you've read the books, this is how Katniss really is. She stands out in every scene she plays in. So, in my opinion, Jennifer Lawrence IS Katniss, and she did a great job. Josh Hutcherson did a great job with Peeta, Woody Harrelson did a great job with Haymitch, and Elizabeth Banks did a great job with Effie. The only complaint I have with the acting is Liam Hemsworth's role as Gale. Other than him, everybody did a good job... The screenplay was actually excellent. Other movie adaptations make up their own words, and use completely other quotes that do not match up with the characters. Hunger Games, yes, is a victim of this crime but thankfully, they decided to almost use all of the words from the book; the important ones that is. It made the film more faithful, and it made the film more enjoyable, in my opinion... The next department I have lots to say about. Everybody has been complaining about this, and I have no exact idea why, so I wanted to make it more understandable about how I feel about it. The action sequences, the violence.. The book was surely a violent novel, and it had lots of crazy situations going on. If the book didn't somehow get consumed by 'tweens' then the "problem" wouldn't be here, but people are complaining of how brutal and dark it is not. I completely disagree with this statement, as I was actually surprised of how dark and violent the film was. The movie was filmed shaky, as in to disguise the gore and violence, but the stuff is still pretty visible. I'm actually pretty disturbed at how people are complaining about how they want to see more gore and violence within a movie about children killing children? Makes no sense... This leads me to the next big complaint: the shaky cam. Here's what I believe: the first, say, 10 minutes are the only minutes to be complaining about a shaky cam. The following is either to disguise the brutality or just a few seconds of moving the camera around. I actually sat there observing the issue, and had to question how people are still complaining about this. I've seen far too many films with shaky cams, and when I hear the term, I would never even place this film in my mind... The next thing I'd like to talk about is the style of the film. The futuristic look was actually really good. The districts looked poor and dirty, which was how I envisioned it from reading the novel. The capitol was rich and mean, and was polluted was strange-looking characters, which was how I envisioned it from the novel. I loved how they tried to keep it as close to the novel, and to be honest, none of the complaints about the film are credible, because they did a fantastic job creating the world as we envisioned it... The next (and last) thing I wanted to review is the changes from novel to the big screen. The biggest change, or the hardest thing to do, was to tell the story differently. The novel was actually from Katniss's POV, and creating a film without hearing Katniss's narration is pretty hectic. This was the best change, because I have no idea what I would've done. The next change was the presence of the gamekeeper, Seneca Crane. The book never even talked about him much, and his name wasn't something to be remembered, but the director decided to use him as to make Catching Fire happen. It worked, too, because I loved to see him on the screen. He made the film greater, and the little talks between him and President Snow were awesome to see. The other changes were very subtle, and only the die-hard fans would take notice. By the end of the film, they went over my head and my anticipation for Catching Fire rose...
VERDICT: I recommend this fan for anyone. Whether you've read the book or not, you'll be pleasantly surprised on how this "teenage" dystopia story is, as it builds tension and surprises all around. If you hate shaky cam, which many people seemed to be oh so sickened by, then maybe you should stay back, because I hate to see people bash on the film for a minor difference. If your a die-hard fan, then it's going to be a love it or hate it, because while it changes some things that could get you worried, it does is subtly and keeps the parts that matter. If you LOVE to compare movies, then I suggest stay away. The novel maybe was inspired by, but not simply copied and pasted from, Battle Royale, but the differences are there and this is so much better. Everything is all there to make this the best movie adaptation ever. 10/10.