Fine for young novel fanatics, but mediocre film

Rating: 6/10 (23 March 2012)

Just returned from the theaters. Let me make this clear firsthand, I did *not* read the books. I wanted to see what the hype was about and entered the movies ready to judge the Hunger Games as a film rather than a realization of the books. I have to say I was disappointed. The movie unsuccessfully tried to cram what appeared to be highlights of the novel's plot into 2.5 hours, shifting awkwardly from one conflict to the next. The pacing of the movie was terrible, with the opening sequences rushed, shaky, and almost unbearable to watch. Flurries of shots wizzed across the screen, each held for 1-2 seconds, attempting to illustrate the helter skelter of the main character, "Katniss." The result was a ratchety relationship barely developed between "Katniss," and what should be the driving force behind her efforts, her family.
Towards the second act of the film, I thought the movie would actually be OK; Katniss's character development improved and some intriguing conflicts arose posing potentially satisfying plot twists for her own journey. Yet none of these opportunities were maximized, and seemingly important developments were dropped for other conflicts that had no precursor whatsoever. There was honestly no tension anywhere else apart from the chase scenes of the movie, plus some awkward departure scenes in the beginning-- a style which I highly doubt dominated the novel. An earlier review noted how it seemed like the director just read the Sparknotes and crafted the movie-- a criticism which rings well with the movie's lack of meaningful development. The movie used the audience as a crutch, depicting events not as a means of solidifying the story,instead just paying small tributes (pun) to the novel.
The books sounds like it would be a much better read. Once established, the premise seemed extremely promising with a lot of potential. Throughout the movie, I heard the teenage groupies giggling at the jokes that were most likely funnier in the book, but carried off poorly on screen. I'm guessing the books weaved the dramatic elements together much better. The movie crossed the bare minimum for developing plot, and only managed to carry across the basic storyline of the book. Yet I did not feel anywhere as involved in the story as throughout the Harry Potter series, which I thought was a much better execution than Hunger Games. So go ahead, pay that $12 for the movie ticket, but don't expect anything beyond a weak slideshow of chapter summaries.