A slow and frustrating film that is held together by its strong and capable cast

Rating: 6/10 (15 April 2012)

Because of all the hype surrounding The Hunger Games (Dir. Gary Ross, 2012) I presumed it was going to be heavily entertaining and enjoyable. But on the contrary, it was slow and frustrating. I found little empathy for any of the characters and struggled to understand what should have been a very simple plot that somehow became more and more complex as the film dragged on.
I will firstly point out that I have not read the books and so I went into the film with only the understanding that The Hunger Games focuses on a yearly event where children end up fighting other children to survive. By the end of the film I discovered that The Hunger Games was essentially a desensitised Hollywood adaptation of Battle Royale (Dir. Kinji Fukasaku, 2000) with a greater back story. Also because The Hunger Games is based on the first in a series of books I was able to tell that nothing bad would happen to the protagonist, which perhaps helps in the films slow narrative progression.
The Hunger Games rushes the beginning plot in order to reach the games, and therefore a lot of the story is lost. This rushed first hour forces a sense of mild confusion onto the spectator, as we are unsure of the significance of multiple characters and symbols that only fans can relate too. The camera-work of the opening twenty minutes before Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) is swept away to the capitol is fantastic. The uncomfortable camera angles followed by quick cuts or jump cuts create a sense of fear and uneasiness. This same effect is used when the games finally get underway to emphasise the violence that is taking place, without focus on the blood and gore. However the games also drag on for another hour. Many of the scenes within this section feel overextended and a few of them unneeded. Surprisingly, in the last twenty minutes of the film it increases pace and enjoyment before rushing through the final few scenes, in order to reach the two hour mark.
For an expensive and high grossing blockbuster one would expect the CGI to be believable and realistic, which in majority they are. But in one scene in particular where Katniss and Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutcherson) are arriving on chariot into the capitol, they are both wearing suits that are supposedly on fire. Whether it is the audience superimposed onto the green screen behind them, or the fire that doesn't even look like fire, this scene was sickening to watch in what was otherwise a beautiful and creative film.
Acting-wise, Woody Harrelson and Elizabeth Banks exceeded my expectations as they provided a surrogate mother and father, to an extent, for Katniss and Peeta. The characters presented in The Hunger Games are all very different as they have individual traits. Unfortunately because of these differences there is almost no attachment created between the audience and the characters, except perhaps Katniss as she is the protagonist. However due to her cold nature and bland facial expressions Katniss is also not entirely relatable to.
When a film mentions its own title almost every minute it is never a good sign and The Hunger Games was no exception. The lack initiative or common sense used by the majority of the characters throughout the games is heavily frustrating – look out for the tree scene or a scene with Rue (Amandla Stenberg). Many characters are introduced and then forgotten, which can only be preparation for a sequel, a flaw that The Lord of the Rings trilogy managed to avoid. All in all The Hunger Games was an enjoyable watch with many avoidable flaws. Perhaps its sequel will be more entertaining
http://dalelawsonreviews.tumblr.com/