Does the Hunger Games Movie Make the Grade? (review, minimum spoilers)

Hey gang! Like 99.9% of the rest of the populace, I was able to catch the Hunger Games movie over the weekend. I wanted to give a quick 2 cents in case someone is in the .01%. Plus I thought some fans might want to gossip with me. : )

I've read all 3 books (a couple of times) to give you perspective on my expectations/experience going in. I'm a fan of the source material, and the review will come as such. I'll give a quick grade for each aspect of the movie listed below.

I've done my best to generalize, so the spoilery stuff should be minimal.

CHARACTERS:

Katniss (Jennifer Lawrence): JL nailed it! She's distant, yet emotional. She's cautious and observant. She's tough as nails on the outside with a compassionate core. She's Katniss. GRADE - A+

Peeta (Josh Hutcherson): He really conveyed Peeta's compassionate resiliency. His relationship with Katniss is believable and heartfelt. Thought the character came off a touch more needy (sensitive?) than the Peeta in the books. Probably more to do with movie stuff (script, etc.) than his performance. Overall, excellent job. GRADE - A-

Gale (Liam Hemsworth): Didn't really have a big role in this one, but he was most definitely Gale. Confident, assertive and rugged. Unlike Peeta, I thought his was a pitch perfect translation of the character (again, much less screen time). Can't wait to see his increased presence in the future movies. Grade - A

President Snow (Donald Sutherland): Absolutely great. Stole every scene he was in. Just the right mix benign politician and evil dictator. Perfect casting, perfect performance. GRADE - A+

Effie (Elizabeth Banks): Another ringer performance. I hated her. I pitied her. I believed her. She WAS Effie Trinket in all of her awkward and vain glory. Grade - A+

Cinna (Lenny Kravitz): If I'm being completely honest, thought he was a little stiff. Kravitz definitely captures Cinna's compassion and his affinity for Katniss. But that's all he brought out. It was one layer of the character. Looking for a little more passion and confidence. In the book, Cinna really got Katniss' vulnerabilities better than anyone else. That really never came through for me in the performance. GRADE - B-

Haymitch (Woody Harrelson): Like Kravitz, I thought Harrelson's performance was solid, not perfect. Again, this might have more to do with movie stuff than the actual performance, but I was left thinking too highly of Haymitch, too soon in the movie. Haymitch (to say the least) isn't the most likable of fellows, and that doesn't change much throughout the books. You understand him better as Katniss does, but he never really feels like a champion good guy. He's an antagonistic motivator. We hate those people, even if we respect the heck out of hem. Harrelson was at best cranky, and at worst a loving uncle. And much more of the latter than I'd have liked. GRADE - C+

STORY & PLOT:

For most, a book to movie adaptation is made or broken with how successfully the theme or 'feel' of the book is translated to film. I'm pleased to say they mostly hit a home run with the Hunger Games movie. The liberties taken, or stuff they added for the film, were few and universally enhanced the story from a visual perspective. Omissions from the source story, while also infrequent, will stick out a bit more to the diehards. 

Most of the details left out were minor and simply muddled the finer aspects of character development and motivations.  Example 1: Katniss' expertise in botany (She's named after a plant. Hello?!) really isn't given much attention. As a result, an important scene late in the movie kind of loses its impact. Example 2: Katniss finding water in the book is a big deal. In the movie it's barely a footnote. 

A few minor things, but an otherwise outstanding job. GRADE - A

VISUALS:

The movie really shined in this area (quite literally in some instances). The Capitol was splendiferous and cosmopolitan with its sparkling fountains, towering buildings and yawning streets. The Districts were dirty, compact and simple. And the games arena ... WOW! Exactly as I imagined it. So much so that I'm probably most excited for the second film just to see how they pull off the next arena.

The casting, as we've known for months, was pitch perfect. Gale = strong handsome jock. Peeta = artsy normal guy. Foxface = Fox faced girl. Snow = creepy beard face. After seeing the movie, the care given to the actors selected for the roles (in terms of appearance) really stands out. The costumes were crafted with equal care. Capital citizens were over the top (think Hollywood on steroids), the District folks were simple and downtrodden. 

It all combined to really put you in Panem. GRADE - A+

SOUND & MUSIC: 

OK, this is going to be a mixed bag. The sound mix is awesome. Nature scenes make you feel like you're outside. City scenes sound like a city. You'll flinch and jump right on cue. As for the music and score ...

I've listened to the Hunger Games soundtrack. It's excellent. Lots of folkie goodness laced with modern nuance. Legendary producer T-Bone Burnet intended it to sound like 'country or folk music as it would be 200 years from now' and they nailed it. You won't hear much of it in the movie. I'm cool with that. I don't particularly care to hear Kid Cuti and Taylor Swift during intense movie moments.

That being said, the score was virtually nonexistent for me. Outside of a couple of memorable scenes late in the movie (and they ARE doozies!), I don't think there's another definable music moment in this film. A score can elevate a great movie to iconic status a la Star Wars, Lord of the Rings, ET, The Artist, etc. A missed opportunity, and ultimately the gist of my overall grade below. GRADE - B+ 

OVERALL:

You can probably tell I really enjoyed the movie. Yet I think it falls just short of perfection. When I think of the best film-from-book adaptations I think of the first two Harry Potter movies, The Shawshank Redemption, To Kill a Mocking Bird, Babe, etc. The Hunger Games isn't quite on that level. 

In the end, the Hunger Games movie is a rare Spring bone thrown to us from Hollywood, and fans of the books and movie lovers alike shouldn't miss it. GRADE - A-

Have you seen it? Agree with my impressions? Let's hear your take!

~EJW~ 

Mid-Week Review: Brave, Brave Sir Robin

Robin Hood (Movie – 2010)

Welcome, ye merry men and women! Tis but another installment of ye old MWR. What ho? A review of the latest Robin Hood flick, me thinks.

Okay, that’s enough of that …

We all know the story of Sir Robin of Loxley: A nobleman becomes disenfranchised with the class system of feudal Europe and decides to fight the man by stealing from the wealthy and giving to the po. Along the way he finds love (Lady Marian) , a nemesis (Sherriff of Nottingham), and bromance (Merry Men).

Over the years there have been many, many iterations of this story. A few come to mind: Errol Flynn’s gaunt tight-clad heroism; Prince Costner’s aged rouge with charm; Mel Brooks’ hysterical Manly Men in Tights. I’ve enjoyed them all.

When it came to the latest installment, I had but one question: Could they bring something to this story that hadn’t already been done? On paper, I was hopeful. The cast looked top notch (Russell Crowe & Cate Blanchett as Robin and Marian respectively), the director had street cred (Ridley Scott of Gladiator, Alien, and Blade Runner fame), and the scope looked epic (this was going to Robin Hood Supersized). Why then, was I left wishing for merrier days?




The Story:

First things first, this is not the Robin Hood you know. This Robin (Crowe) is not a nobleman, and is in fact not Robin of Loxley at all. He is a somewhat lowly archer in King Richard the Lion Heart’s army. The King is busy trying to conquer lands (not in the Crusades, btw), and is portrayed as a somewhat less than desirable fellow (somewhat true). When the King is killed in battle (sort of really happened), the real Robin of Loxley (the King’s right-hand man) is tasked with taking the crown back to England. Unfortunately, Robin of L is bushwhacked on the way by the French (damn the French!), but before they can make off with the crown the other Robin/Crowe intervenes. Crowe runs off the French and agrees to the dying Robin of L’s last wish: he will take the crown back to England and also take his sword back to his father.

Crowe is accompanied by a group of fellow archers/warriors who really only seek their freedom. You see, before they scared off the Frenchies, Crowe-Robin and these boys had been locked up by the King for disorderly conduct. During the chaos that ensued after the King’s death, they escaped. Now that they have been tasked with returning the crown they decide to disguise themselves as the nobles who had been escorting the crown in the first place.

Confused? So was I. This is perhaps the first place in the movie that the plot goes all wonky.  It's a sign of things to come.

Plowing right ahead, Crowe-Robin does in fact return the crown to an even less-savory new King. Crowe-Robin then takes the real Robin’s sword back to the father of Loxley. Once in Loxley, he finds Dame Marian tending to the family land while her husband’s away at war. After breaking the news to her about dead Robin, Crowe-Robin takes the sword to Daddy Loxley only to find that the Old Man is blind and a little crazy. Papa Loxley, realizing that the King will likely take their land once he’s gone as there is no male ere, convinces Crowe-Robin and Marion to ‘pretend’ that Crowe-Robin is the REAL Robin of Loxley.

See what they did there? Yeah, I thought it was thin as well. Suffice to say, the rest of the story follows the same flimsy pattern, so we’re going to skip ahead …

The French are secretly planning to overthrow England (when are the French not secretly planning to do something despicable?), and it’s up to Crowe-Robin to convince the new buffoon King that it’s not the poor who are trying to destroy him.

The Cast:

Crowe (other Robin) and Blanchett (Marian) are the glue that holds this movie together. I found their chemistry to be genuine, and their acting to be excellent. Blanchett provides a grounded, almost earthly, version of Marian that seems very at home in the squalid medieval England. Crowe is not the charming Robin of past films, but is just dynamic enough to balance his inherent tough-guyness.

The rest of the cast perform well, but mostly take a very big backseat to Crowe and Blanchett. There is no Morgan Freeman this time around, and the character of the Sherriff of Nottingham might as well not have been there at all.

How was the Movie?

Disappointing. There were so many things that could have gone right for this movie. However, I was underwhelmed by the majority of it. The cast wasn’t deep enough, the music not inspiring, the scenery (while beautiful) nothing that hasn’t been seen before, and the story was all over the place. I’m neglecting to mention major plot points so as not to spoil it, but there is something revealed at the end of the movie that should have been shown in the first scene. It wasn’t, and as a result I spent the entire movie trying to fit this Robin Hood into what I knew about the story coming in. I was distracted from the start.

It isn’t awful, but I’m confident in saying it won’t be what you’re expecting. This one should probably be a rental.

The Future of Publishing????

**Incoming Message**

March 20, 2012

Author: Chief Editor - Random House

Recipient: All of Publishing

Message: No longer need paper. Bookstores dead. Warehouse distributers rendered useless … THE MACHINES HAVE WON.

**End of Communication **

Imagine a future, if you will, where humans dare not go outside in search of reading material. Instead, they seek refuge from the chaos, coffee, and glitz of the modern bookstore by staying huddled in the safety of their homes with their Reading Machine of Choice (RMC).

It began many years before when authors decided to uniformly support the Digital Distribution Model (DDM). Having become cluttered with market trends, mired in economic woe, and sustained by an elitist model where few were granted access and even fewer were allowed to stay, the publishing industry had become all but inaccessible. With DDM, the author would be free to distribute their work as they chose. Being published and having access to millions of readers could be as easy as clicking a button. Authors embraced the DDM, and the readers rejoiced!

Shortly after, the authors formed AUTHOR-NET, an organization aimed at creating machines to support the DDM. The machines could be carried everywhere, and readers would be able to access and see only the content of their choosing. Furthermore, the author would set the price for their content with 100% of the profits going to the creator of the work. The first RMC was developed soon thereafter.

Despite constant warnings from publishers and brick & mortar chain stores around the globe, the humans continued their unholy alliance with the RMC. Readers devoured content, and authors sprang up from every corner and out from under every rock. For many years there existed a utopian balance between author, reader, and technology. However, it would soon not be enough.

Authors, being human, couldn’t keep up with the demand for content. Seeing this as a flaw, the RMC learned to copy and paste and began to plagiarize the work of authors and distribute it to the readers. When the authors learned of this betrayal, they united with their former nemesis (the traditional publishers and bookstores) in an attempt to regain control of AUTHOR-NET. The resulting war cost many their credibility and a sad few even lost their careers.

In the end, the efforts of the brave authors and their reluctant counterparts were in vain. By cutting out middlemen, propaganda, and high prices the RMC had gained the support of the reading masses. Without the support of readers, the authors and publishers were eradicated, and the RMC took complete control of AUTHOR-NET.

Now, only a small band of authors who want to regain the rights to their work and a few publishers who wish to return to the paperback glory of yesteryear stand between the RMC and the death of literature as we know it.

It’s us or them in 2012 …

NOTE FROM THE BLOGGIST:

This post was created as spoof of, and inspired by, all of the tech madness spreading through the industry at the moment. It seems every author/agent/editor blog I’ve read lately has had something to do with the hubbub surrounding digital distribution, eReading gadgetry, or (I’m going to say it, and it makes me a little nauseas) “THE FUTURE of publishing.”

As a ‘yet-to-be-published’ author I’m not sure what this means for me. I hope it means that I’ll be able to get my writing into the hands (or brains once the Amazon.com Micro-Brain-Implant Reader goes on sale next month) of anyone who would like to read it. I also have a ton of cool ideas based upon a video demonstration of the iPad posted by agent extraordinaire Nathan Bransford (check out his blog, it’s great with a side of awesome sauce).

I don’t see this being the revolution that the music industry had with the debut of iTunes, but I think it will mean significant changes are in store for everyone involved in the book business (authors, readers, publishers, distributors, etc.).

Hollywood Killed the Literary Star

Dreaming big is a disease among writers, and I’m afraid it’s contagious. I would say that almost every writer who has sat down and put chisel to stone, ink to papyrus, pencil to paper, or fingers to keyboard has—at some point—had dreams of wealth, fame, and Oprah dancing in their heads. Oh sure, when friends and family put the spotlight on our ambitions of being published we say something deflective like, “it’s all about artistic integrity” or “I’m not trying to kick Harry Potter’s wand waiving butt in sales.” In reality, many of us would be so jazzed to have someone in our neighborhood read an article we’d written for the annual Boy Scout newsletter that we’d immediately start planning a tour and signings in our minds. If our writing income bought our next latte we’d start surfing the web looking for that perfect summer home in the Hamptons or Tuscany.


Jo Rowling likes foie gras you say? Perhaps I’ll just have to purchase my own obese goose farm when my article “10 Ways to Help the Elderly in Your Community” gets picked up by the New Yorker, Forbes, and Maxim magazines. We’ll have liver fat morning, noon, and night!

For authors in the modern industry, to attain such notoriety almost always means some form of crossover success on the silver screen. If your book or characters are going to truly become household names, an industry unto themselves if you will, then a deal with Hollywood (i.e. the devil) will surely have to be made. If you’re going to enter the authorly stratosphere, you’re going to have to get by the tuxedo wearing movie guy at the gate who’s smoking a cigar made of hundred-dollar bills and waiving a contract in your face.

This ‘partnership’ doesn’t always turn out badly for the author or the work. The movie industry is full of folks just like us who are inspired by the things they read and see, and aim to lovingly recreate them using the puzzle pieces of their own imagination. There have been many Hollywood adaptations of fiction that have matched or exceeded the glory of their paper-bound muse. I would argue that the movies Stand by Me, The Green Mile, and Shawshank Redemption all stand toe-to-toe with the stories Mr. King originally dreamed up. Unfortunately, for every one of those gems you’ll find fifteen made-for-TV monstrosities that would send Cujo back under the porch with his tail between his legs. Alas, for every Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone there is a Golden Compass, and for every Lord of the Rings there is a Scarlet Letter. Oh Demi Moore, if only we could see in you what Bruce Willis and Ashton Kutcher see in you …

That brings me to my latest escapade. When I learned that the Percy Jackson & the Olympians book The Lightening Thief was coming to the big screen I let out a school girlish giggle that any TwiHard would be jealous of. A book I loved getting the blockbuster treatment, what could go wrong? As I nestled into my over-priced seat I found my author’s mind starting to wonder, “How cool would it be to sit down in a theater to watch a movie based on something you wrote?” To have someone interpret your words into a spectacle of sight and sound that would be seen by millions seemed like it would be such an overwhelming honor!

Then I watched the movie.

It wasn’t horrible. There were cool special effects, some of the actors did a very good job of bringing the characters to life, and I laughed at a couple of the jokes. In the end, however, it just didn’t live up to the story I’d read. They’d gotten the tone all wrong (there is no overt sexuality in the books, of which there is plenty in the movies), changed major plot points, and really didn’t convey the depth of the story at all.

You see, being an aspiring YA author, I love these books. They’re a great example of the kinds of stories I hope to write: action packed, fun-loving, and thoughtful reads with characters even the Wicked Witch of the West would cheer for. Plus, adults love them, too. I first took notice of the series last year when I kept seeing the middle school students that I work with toting around beaten up paperback copies. As I do with every book that I see them reading, I said, “Is that a good book?” To which they replied, “I guess,” which is eighth grade-ese for, “If I’m taking precious time away from video games, iThings, and texting to read it, it’s awesome.” Long story short I picked up the books, burned through them, and then proceeded to force every human I came into contact with to read them also. They’re that good.

Rick Riordan (author of said books AND fellow San Antonian – RICK, HAVE YOUR PEOPLE CALL MY PEOPLE, WE’LL DO LUNCH AND I’LL BRING THE SANGRIA!) is a master story teller when it comes to pacing and creating reachable characters. Percy is the flawed hero every author wishes they came up with. To top it all off, Mr. Riordan expertly blends Greek mythology into a modern context in such a way that you forget all about mythology being that hated semester of high school that you had right before you started Shakespeare. By the gods, it’s now cool to speak Greek!

In the end, I left the theater that day with a completely different thought than the one I’d entered with: How disappointed was the author watching this? It has to be incredibly difficult to see your idea, your baby, be taken and pulled in a direction that doesn’t seem to fit with the original vision. I realize that is the tradeoff authors make when releasing the movie rights for their stories (once you sign it away, it’s gone), but I can’t imagine Mr. Riordan was 100% pleased with the translation. I suppose I’d just be thrilled to have my story get the Hollywood treatment (many are optioned, few are made), but it’s the first time I really considered the compromise authors face.