The Hunger Games Review

Don't worry -- the odds are in your favor.
Full review by Isaac Handelman

Let’s cut to the chase. If you loved Suzanne’s Collins’ novel, then there’s no question that you will feel similar towards The Hunger Games. This is a fan’s movie, if there ever was one. Do not fret that Games will stray too far from the book’s narrative -- it doesn’t. Don’t be afraid that Katniss’ actress won’t be any good -- she is. If you have read the book, then stop reading now, go to your nearest cinema and see this movie. If you have not read the book, then go read the book, and then go to your nearest cinema and see this movie. Either way you go about it, you will heartily enjoy The Hunger Games.

If you don’t already know the story of The Hunger Games, then you may be in need of a serious pop-culture refresher. The story revolves around Katniss Everdeen, a seventeen year old living in a dystopian future where a group of twenty-four young people are chosen at random to participate in an arena fight to the death. Primrose, Katniss’ sister, is promptly chosen to participate in the “Hunger Games”, and Katniss volunteers to take her place. The film doesn’t waste any time getting to this point, and that’s a good thing. While a few character relationships back home aren’t as fleshed out as they could be (more on that later), the filmmakers obviously recognized that it was important to pick up a brisk pace and maintain it.

Putting aside a few overly-dramatized moments which could have the potential to stir up a few chuckles, the acting is strong all around. Jennifer Lawrence gives a standout performance as Katniss Everdeen, embodying the character as she was in the book. She’s backed by an A-list of supporting cast members: Josh Hutcherson does a great job of making us care about Peeta Mellark, Lenny Kravitz delivers a surprisingly steady performance as Cinna, and the flawlessly cast Woody Harrelson plays a pitch-perfect Haymitch. Surprisingly, the only actor who misses the mark is veteran Donald Sutherland as President Snow, whose behavior is too sporadic, rendering it difficult to gain a clear grasp on the character’s motivations or intentions.

Some sacrifices obviously must be made in order to compensate for the brief nature of a film as compared to a novel, and The Hunger Games is no different. A few character relationships, particularly those between Katniss and Gale and Katniss and Rue, feel like they’re hit the hardest by these compromises. A few character deaths come across as rather shortsighted as well, struggling to deliver the situational pathos that the book delivered. However, this is to be expected in any film adaptation, and, not to spoil anything, some of the changes that The Hunger Games makes from its source material are actually for the better, namely the way in which Katniss comes in possession of the mockingjay pen, which I found to be much more effective here than in the novel.

Now that we’ve gotten those quibbles out of the way, it’s on to the good stuff. There’s a tendency of a book’s loyal fan-base to cry foul when a film adaptation strays far from the book’s narrative. The filmmakers behind The Hunger Games obviously care greatly for the novel, and were seeking to do it justice. This film is unabashedly loyal to its source material (with a few small exceptions). While some will be turned off by this facet, as it does lower The Hunger Games’ unpredictability factor, it works marvels for what the movie is trying to be. That is, The Hunger Games novel in a visual form. And that’s what makes the film special.

Sure you’ll get plenty of enjoyment out of The Hunger Games if you haven’t read the books. You’ll probably be intrigued by its dystopian setting, and you’ll be thrilled by its visceral action. However, in order to truly appreciate the beauty of what the film offers up, you should read the book first. Being able to witness the events of the narrative play out in front of your eyes, as real people inhabit the characters you have grown to love and a multi-million-dollar budget allows for rendering of all those magical places described in the book is, to put it plainly, a spectacular experience. It’s what The Hunger Games does best. 

It’s here that I must draw a comparison to another multimedia franchise, albeit one a bit older and on the opposite end of the spectrum as far as beginnings and ends go. Not since Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone have I been so swept away by a film adaptation, and been so enamored with the newfound visual experience. Judged purely as a movie, sure, the film has its flaws. Not every character relationship is perfectly fleshed out, a few qualities of the film are a bit cliched for the genre (i.e., the pivotal love triangle), and there are some instances of over-editing. But judged purely as an adaptation, The Hunger Games soars. As a big fan of the books, it’s really difficult to complain too much. What’s offered up here left me overwhelmingly satisfied. And, assuming you’re familiar with the source material, I see no reason why you won’t feel exactly the same way.

Final Score:

8.0/10

“Great”