The Hunger Games

< Previous Trailer  |   Add to My Scrapbook  |   Next Trailer >
The Hunger Games

85% Liked It
liked it

The Hunger Games

Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, Liam Hemsworth, Woody Harrelson, Elizabeth Banks

Every year in the ruins of what was once North America, the evil Capitol of the nation of Panem forces each of its twelve districts to send a teenage boy and girl to compete in the Hunger Games. A twi... read more read more...sted punishment for a past uprising and an ongoing government intimidation tactic, The Hunger Games are a nationally televised event in which "Tributes" must fight with one another until one survivor remains. Pitted against highly-trained Tributes who have prepared for these Games their entire lives, Katniss is forced to rely upon her sharp instincts as well as the mentorship of drunken former victor Haymitch Abernathy. If she's ever to return home to District 12, Katniss must make impossible choices in the arena that weigh survival against humanity and life against love. -- (C) Lionsgate

Id: 11153337

Do you want to see this movie?

My Friends Said...

The Hunger Games Recent Reviews

Register or sign-in to see your friends' reviews !

Recent Reviews

The Hunger Games Recent Reviews
  • MizturY0da
    May 26, 2012
    MizturY0da
    three stars
  • MovieGeek13
    May 19, 2012
    MovieGeek13
    Aside from a few story changes that don't really affect the overall outcome of the narrative, the film adaptation of Suzanne Collins' brilliant novel, The Hunger Games, captures the political and social undertones while making a fast paced sci-fi action picture that doesn't explo... read moreit the idea of kids being trapped in an arena to fight to the death. Director Gary Ross knows what he's doing. It helps that he had Ms. Collins as a co-writer and producer to help him accurately portray the novel in the way she envisioned it. That doesn't necessarily make for a good film; The Hunger Games is a great film because of its pacing, its focus, the performances, and the way the film skims over the violence of the novels for a more accurate portrayal of a nation that governs its people through fear and fascism.
    Front and centre to all this is Katniss Everdeen, the young heroine played by Jennifer Lawrence. Lawrence may be a bit old for the part, but she understands every little conscious and subconscious motive of her character. Just the slightest look from her communicates an entire page of inner monologue from her character in the book. Equally great are her romantic supporting characters, Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) and Gale (Liam Hemsworth). The focus is not on them, but their limited screen presence adds to the complexity of the story and Katniss' plight. Woody Harrelson deserves a best supporting actor nod for his work as the always drunk but very smart Haymitch Abernathy. And the ever great Donald Sutherland portrays President Snow as the ideal villain who will have a very big roll in the films to come.
    The film has a more epic focus than the novel, which focused solely around Katniss. It would have been too difficult and too shallow to make a film that satirizes reality tv without multiple perspectives. Ross and Co. remarkably succeed in adding new scenes and finding new ways of communicating all the things that happen apart from Katniss, making the nation of Panem seem as believable and real as the danger in which these children have been forced to be in.
    The summer has started early, and The Hunger Games sets the bar astonishingly high for this year's blockbusters. This is a film with intelligence that understands that films work when the action and effects serve the story, not the other way around.
  • StarCrossedVoyager
    May 19, 2012
    StarCrossedVoyager
    Having not read the books, I was pretty reluctant to join the over-hype of the film and only saw it in the cinema by chance but I can say I'm honestly so thankful that I saw it. It's a great and involving film with plenty of brilliant young actors on board. There really isn't muc... read moreh I can fault about this, but I'm being picky so it really bugged me that it's very similar to the Japanese Battle Royale (even though the author of the books claimed to have never heard of it), so for me it lost a bit of credibility. Also, Lawrence did do a brilliant performance, however as others have noted she doesn't look the starving girl living to survive which broke the realism of the film but other than that I can't really complain. A great film.
  • bottcorecords1
    May 16, 2012
    bottcorecords1
    "The Hunger Games" (for those of you who don't know) is, like Harry Potter or Twilight, a book (or series of books) aimed at young adults which has been made into an extraordinarily profitable film. While films like this are typically geared towards the adolescent fans of the bo... read moreoks, it's always interesting for the outsider (mainly me) to see if a coherent (or even watchable for that matter) film can be made from the source material. The film "The Hunger Games" definitely has it's quirks, the very idea of a 'hunger games' seems like it would be counter-productive to any fascist regime's goals, but overall, it's a surprisingly entertaining bit of B-movie sci-fi.

    The story revolves around a girl named Katniss (Jennifer Lawrence), who has volunteered to take her sister's place in the Hunger Games after her sister wins the draft lottery to represent their district (there are 12 districts and each one picks one boy and one girl to represent them). At the Hunger Games, these kids will fight to the death, and the winner will be crowned the victor of the hunger games and will be some sort of a hero or something I guess. There have been seventy four of these hunger games, which began as some sort of penance or tribute the 12 districts must show after some sort of failed rebellion (or something). I'm not really sure, the point is, the kids all fight. Katniss is an expert tracker and bow hunter and is picked as an odds on early favorite. The male counterpart from her district (Josh Hutcherson), may not have her outdoors savvy, but he learns to use the media to garner favor. You see, the Hunger Games are as much about winning fans from the upper classes as they are about surviving and killing. The more support you get from rich patrons, the better your chances of survival will become. It's sort of like 'American Idol' meets 'Deathrace 2000'.

    While there is a lot of fun in The Hunger Games, and a lot to root for, the overall package isn't very well developed. The film draws heavily from Aldous Huxley's "Brave New World" and it's dystopian society, but it lacks impetus. A seventy five year old tradition of murder and suicide has to be kept going by something other than fear and intimidation. The people participating have to actually believe in it, or else it's doomed from the get go. There is some very brief lip service paid to the notion that the hunger games are a source of pride for the participating districts, but really all that's shown onscreen is public dissent. Using these games as a means of quelling the masses is pretty ineffective both in conception and in execution. Really, why are the hunger games accepted for 75 years? Why aren't the people in power, with their godlike technological power more sympathetic to the demands of the people who produce their raw materials? How can they be so blithely unaware their master plan is so ineffectual? Maybe I'm putting too much thought into something that's meant only as disposeable entertainment (both the movie and the plot device within). As I said before, the film was entertaining (albeit a little cheesy), but as a mirror held up to society's evils, it's a bit under-developed and perhaps even a little naive.
  • itsjustme2004
    May 14, 2012
    itsjustme2004
    I have read all the books in this series, and I absolutely loved them. This movie was not NEARLY as compelling as the books, in my opinion..but it was good, and well done. There were some people left out completely, which made them have to rewrite some important scenes. For examp... read morele, how she acquired the Mockingjay pin. That is completely different, and made me go "huh?". But. all in all, they did a decent job with a rather unique concept film. I am very interested to see how they work the rest of the books....
  • fb791220692
    May 10, 2012
    fb791220692
    Pretty faithful to the novel and well-acted by both Lawrence and Hutcherson (and his stupid jawline), The Hunger Games is fun and well-paced, though the atrociously cheesy dialogue from Collins' books become glaringly painful on the screen. Also, with so many characters, the movi... read moree struggles to make you care about any of them other than Katniss.
  • hobster1
    May 9, 2012
    hobster1
    Screenwriters understand that what makes science fiction ultimately succeed isn't a lot of special effects and pyrotechnics, it's fascinating characters. The fact that the games don't actually start until past the halfway point wasn't a problem for me. This concerns a loss of inn... read moreocence, not which child can throw a knife better. Jennifer Lawrence is star Katniss Everdeen. Not only does she embody her tough, athletic skills but she projects a vulnerability that is incredibly affecting. Lawrence is believable as our young heroine even when she is up against competitors that are stronger and more physically imposing like Cato from District 2. Matching her is fellow tribute player from District 12, Peeta Mellark, portrayed by Josh Hutcherson. Their relationship is touching. It grounds the picture and we genuinely care about them. Also of note is Rue, a tiny bird-like girl with a lot of heart. Her friendship with Katniss provides one of several engaging plot points. The Hunger Games is always exciting, never boring. Despite the familiar trappings, director Gary Ross infuses the story with a style and excitement that not only benefits the original novel, it improves upon it. Katniss Everdeen is a protagonist we can love and champion. She's at the center of a swift and rousing drama. It's telling that given the 142 minute running time, I was surprisingly prepared for a longer movie. That's how involved I was.
  • mumby1988
    April 30, 2012
    mumby1988
    For all the bile and boredom caused by awards season, few things fill a seasoned film fan with more dread than the first blockbuster of 'the long summer'. The first studio tent-pole of a calendar year can set the tone for the whole period between this year's Oscar party finishing... read more and next year's nominations starting. If that film is bad (worse still, if it's bad and takes money) it can send so-called true film fans running for the hills, going into hibernation to save up for something with an ounce of brains.

    Fortunately, this year is different - at least so far. The Hunger Games, billed as Lord of the Flies for the Twilight generation, has been hyped to the gills like so many of its competitors. The targeted media campaign and huge buzz surrounding the trailers could have resulted in the kind of abject disappointment caused by the majority of modern blockbusters. In fact, it's a really great film, joining the company of Source Code and Inception as one of the best blockbusters of recent times.

    Both the novel and film of The Hunger Games have their roots in dystopian science fiction, something which is clearly brought out in Gary Ross' visual decisions. The film is replete with references to other science fiction and fantasy films which have addressed issues surrounding the possible morality of television, the role of children in society, and how advanced societies have reduced and compartmentalised violence, turning a genuine external threat into a form of entertainment.

    Many critics have compared this to Battle Royale, Kinji Fukasaku's ultra-violent swan song in which hundreds of Japanese schoolchildren are conscripted into a government game and brutally murder each other. While Ross and author Suzanne Collins have not acknowledged Battle Royale as an influence, its gruesome updating of Lord of the Flies is in the back of all The Hunger Games' moral dilemmas. This time around the threat is not nuclear annihilation, nor internal civil unrest: it is the need to reduce violence down to entertainment, using children to pacify and galvanise the masses to prevent history repeating itself.

    The visuals of The Hunger Games are like a catalogue of science fiction references. The long sections in the woods, with Katniss and Peeta teaming up and joining forces, recall the middle section of Logan's Run where Logan and Jessica stumble outside the city walls and discover the ruins of their ancestors. The policemen and riot gear are similar aesthetically to those in Soylent Green, while the rubber cat-suits worn at the presentation of the tributes are a possible nod to the X-Men series.

    There are other references on show too from outside of science fiction. The opening scene, in which children from Sector 12 are lined up to face the Reaping, is eerily close to the long scenes in Schindler's List where the Jews are registered by the German authorities. The fashions in the Capitol, particularly in the costumes worn by Elizabeth Banks, are somewhere between the Flesh Fair from A.I., the films of Tim Burton and the most bizarre offerings of London Fashion Week. There is a grotesquely gothic feel to many of the characters which have the darker aspects of Burton written all over them.

    Under normal circumstances, being able to spot so many such references, and with such ease, would lead to disappointment. They would create a feeling of over-familiarity, a sense that the film was deeply derivative, and that its eye-catching visuals were simply an ineffective distraction from the lack of anything new. But with The Hunger Games this is not the case, and there are two good reasons for this.

    Firstly, it is refreshing to find a modern-day blockbuster which genuinely understands science fiction, and which is trying to present a dystopian, 1970s story with a modern sheen. Much like James Watkins on The Woman in Black, Gary Ross clearly has great knowledge and affection for these kinds of stories, and believes crucially that they have validity for modern audiences. His creative decisions draw from the sci-fi well very deeply, but with every decision he wants his audience to think, offering them familiarity not as a form of comfort but as a platform for further examination.

    Secondly, The Hunger Games uses all these tropes and motifs to tell an interesting story to great effect. The film examines the ethics of reality television, drawing on works like Shock Treatment, The Running Man and especially My Little Eye, which argued that reality TV is essentially the new pornography. The harrowing plight of the young protagonists is set against the backdrop of a society based on extreme inequality and voyeuristic hedonism. The Capitol parties at the expense of those in the Hunger Games, making huge amounts of money while the little people are either murdered or left to starve.

    The film is brilliant at exploring manipulation, again contrasting the internal game theory of the tributes with the outside tampering of the rules. The world outside The Hunger Games is one of flamboyance and excess, with the Games' producers exhibiting as ruthless a drive for ratings as Faye Dunaway's character in Network. They introduce new obstacles whenever audiences get bored, resulting to firebombing the forest and unleashing tigers with no consideration for the competitors.

    This atmosphere of the rules constantly changing is reflected in the characters' psychology. Peeta states ahead of the Games that "whatever happens, I still want to be me" - but as soon as he enters the arena, he forms an alliance with three of his rivals in order to track down and kill Katniss. Katniss likewise finds herself pandering to her audience, flaunting her flaming dress on the chat show to get sponsors and agreeing to 'fall in love' with Peeta. The romance between them is intentionally forced, so that we are unsure whether it is tactical or genuine emotion.

    There has been some controversy over the classification of the film, with much discussion over what may or may not have been omitted to get a 12A. Regardless of what may have been lost, the film is incredibly brutal, with scenes that would be troubling at any level. Ross' rapid handheld camerawork means that the bloody deaths are not shown in as much detail as would be allowed at 15. But even with the evasive camerawork and sparing levels of blood, this is definitely top-end 12A.

    The Hunger Games is impressive for balancing both the shock of its subject matter and the attractive aura of its visual landscape. Certain images in the film are amazingly cool, such as Katniss and Peeta riding into the Capitol in a chariot with flames coming off their clothing. But there are at least as many images which are disturbing, shocking or repulsive, for all the right reasons. The death of Rue is deeply traumatic, interrupting the thrill of the chase to remind us how grim things really are.

    The film is anchored by the tremendous central performance of Jennifer Lawrence. Having excelled in Winter's Bone two years ago, this is the performance that cements her as one of the best young actors in Hollywood. She has grace, grit and immense charisma, creating a character that may come to be regarded as this generation's Lieutenant Ripley. She is capably supported by a career-best Elizabeth Banks, a compellingly irascible Woody Harrelson, a shimmering Stanley Tucci and a wonderfully slimy Toby Jones.

    The Hunger Games is one of the best films of 2012 and perhaps the best blockbuster since Inception. It's clearly not the most visually distinctive film ever made, and the familiarity of its references may put some viewers off. But for the most part it is an impressive demonstration of how good mainstream sci-fi can be when it is made by people who understand both the genre and the fans. There is plenty to chew on in this chilling and thrilling film, and I am genuinely looking forward to the sequel.
  • fb619846742
    April 27, 2012
    fb619846742
    An impressive, clever, entertaining take on politics, culture, and youth, and how in a futuristic society where an oppressive government holds a "Hunger Games" tournament where a boy and girl chosen from each of the twelve districts fight to the death until only one of them is le... read moreft. Skilled archer girl Katniss (Jennifer Lawrence) volunteers for her sister who is selected in a drawing, while shy and sensitive Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) are chosen to represent one of the districts. While the direction nor screenplay possesses the appropriate amount of violence to really drive home the primary message it is trying to drive home (something "Battle Royale", which contains a similar plot structure, does and some), this is still a highly stylized, never uninteresting popcorn flick which works despite its faults. Lawrence, once again like she was in her Oscar-nominated turn in "Winter's Bone" (her character in this movie seems very similar to that of her's in 'Bone'), is convincing in the lead role, while Hutcherson accomplishes his part with flying colors. Sure, it could be a little more meaner and blunt, its major downfall, but for the audience it is geared towards, I can understand why director Gary Ross decided to cut back on the violence a bit. It holds back his film from potential greatness, but it still drives home its points reasonably well.
  • aliceinpunderland
    April 25, 2012
    aliceinpunderland
    I definitely went in with too high of expectations. The first act is nigh perfect in setting up dystopian Appalachia: the shaky handicam shots of miners going to work, raggedly clad children, and weary villagers preparing for the Reaping. Even dull-as-a-box-of-rocks-in-The-Las... read moret-Song, Liam Hemsworth, infuses Gale with levity as well as wistful longing for love and escape. I especially love the reaction shots of the mother after she says something kind to Katniss, but Katniss just deflects the kindness onto Prim - showing the strained relationship between mother and eldest daughter.

    The film spends so much time with the exposition that the next two acts are rushed and ill-developed, specifically Peeta's history and motivations. The bread-in-the-rain scene is shown quite a few times, but it's always the same. They could have elongated the memory to bolster its significance - shown the severity of Katniss' starvation, shown Peeta's intention of burning the bread so that he could throw it to Katniss, shown how that act of kindness saved her and her family's life.

    Peeta's bravery and loyalty doesn't come through, nor does Katniss' complicated but necessary duplicity. In re the former, they could have shown Peeta actually fighting off Cato after the tracker jacker attack so that unfamiliar audiences wouldn't just think he's a milquetoast pretty boy. In re the latter, there could have been more reaction shots of Gale and the spectators, maybe taunting him about the romance or reassuring him that Katniss is just faking it.

    The costumes are glorious, and the settings are lush. All the actors are spot-on (although the actors who play Cato, Marvel, and Peeta all look too similar). Stanley Tucci is adorable and lively as the host. Amandla Stenberg's one perfect tear is perfect. J.Law covers all the bases from stalwart fierceness to pained vulnerability.
View All Reviews

Opening This Week

Top Box Office

Upcoming Movies

New on DVD