The Hunger Games is an entertaining movie, but it doesn't quite deliver.

Rating: 7/10 (29 March 2012)

When I first heard that they were making a movie adaptation of Suzanne Collins's famous book, The Hunger Games, I was excited but cautious because I was worried they would focus less on the violence and cruelty of the games and more on Katniss and Peeta's relationship to preserve the PG-13 rating. Luckily it isn't that bad.
The Hunger Games came out at a good time. The Harry Potter movies are finished, and the Twilight series has only one movie left. If the Hunger Games is successful it could be the next big franchise. Fans of the series should be happy as it definitely has earned enough money for a sequel. It's far from the emotional, deep movie it could have been, but moviegoers will enjoy it as long as they don't expect anything sensational or new.
At the beginning of the movie the basics are explained through text and the movie starts. Katniss's skill with a bow is explained, her sister is picked at the reaping, Katniss takes her place, and Peeta and Katniss are off to the Capitol. That is basically all that happens in District 12. How poor and starving the people are is almost not even explained.
In the Arena fighting is edited to preserve the PG-13 rating. Most of the violence is barely shown. The "bad" guys are flat so no one cares when they die. Josh Hutcherson's Peeta comes off as weak and wimpy. The movie drags on a bit too long, and the ending is predictable. Katniss and Peeta's relationship is weak and poorly addressed.
The Hunger Games could have been worse, but that doesn't mean it's an amazing movie. Poor character development and flat characters hold it back from its potential. Hopefully the inevitable sequel will address these issues.