|
That's basically it. The Capitol had everything on lockdown, and the way to maintain that was the yearly spectacle of the Hunger Games, and those only stayed interesting if they found new ways to kill the tributes.
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 07:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 05:33 |
|
|
AGirlWonder posted:That's basically it. The Capitol had everything on lockdown, and the way to maintain that was the yearly spectacle of the Hunger Games, and those only stayed interesting if they found new ways to kill the tributes. I know its a the-books-are-for-YAs thing with a heap of without-this-theres-no-story, but the whole idea of a Hunger Games kinda rubbed me the wrong way in a  way. They could've called it The Obvious Instrument Of The Inevitable Rebellion That Will Rise Against Us Games.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 17:27
|
|
|
Maybe they shouldn't have called it The Death Star, it's just bad in world marketing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 17:31
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:I know its a the-books-are-for-YAs thing with a heap of without-this-theres-no-story, but the whole idea of a Hunger Games kinda rubbed me the wrong way in a The Hunger Games are a response to that rebellion actually, it already happened.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 20:30
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:The Hunger Games are a response to that rebellion actually, it already happened. Right, I knew that, but it's hard for me to not think that someone didn't think "Have we considered that this might bite us in the rear end eventually?"
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 20:43
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:Right, I knew that, but it's hard for me to not think that someone didn't think "Have we considered that this might bite us in the rear end eventually?" The impression I got is that basically everyone involved was desperately trying to hold things together and nobody involved really had a comfortable long-term game plan they were just trying to recover from what was (IIRC) implied to be a nearly-extinction-of-humanity-type event. I admit I only ever read the books while my little sister was reading them so my memory is imperfect.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2015 21:55
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:Right, I knew that, but it's hard for me to not think that someone didn't think "Have we considered that this might bite us in the rear end eventually?" Snow mentions in the first film (I assume the first book too) how the only thing stronger than fear is hope. A little hope is useful, a lot of hope is dangerous; the Hunger games is meant to spoonfeed the populace just enough hope to keep going along with things. I guess in a way its like convincing homeless people to buy lottery tickets. Personally, what I found weird was why the Capitol didn't just nuke District 13 once they started getting openly uppity. Their population had been devastated by a prior disease, and I cant help but believe that the Capitol would keep tabs on stuff like that. Sure, MAD and all that, but District 13 needed the Capitol intact to legitimately carry out their rebellion. Especially the second half of the film, where the Capitol is getting invaded by the districts. So the Nut is such a critical strategic point that the entire Capitol just ends up folding without it? Even the pods were an act of desperation; once the districts were at the Capitol's doorstep the rebellion had already been successful.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 00:10
|
|
|
This movie did not have to be so god drat long
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 00:41
|
|
|
Panfilo posted:Personally, what I found weird was why the Capitol didn't just nuke District 13 once they started getting openly uppity. IIRC, D13 had all the nukes, and that's why the Capitol decided to let them live on their own as long as they kept out of Capitol bidness. D13 didn't nuke Capitol because there aren't many humans left and the species needs to have all we can to survive.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 03:07
|
|
|
Krowley posted:This movie did not have to be so god drat long Wait, so not only did they needlessly make the third book two movies, this one is long as gently caress too? God damnit. I dunno if you guys are with me, but I quite liked the first two movies and hearing the third book was gonna be stretched into two movies completely and utterly destroyed my interest in the franchise. I dunno if that's unreasonable but nothing about that decision struck me as artful.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 04:51
|
|
|
cat doter posted:Wait, so not only did they needlessly make the third book two movies, this one is long as gently caress too? God damnit. I think the problem with making it one movie is that it would have had to be one LONG movie, like 3 and a half hours. So a compact, good 'mockingjay' is too long for one movie, but too short for two.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 05:02
|
|
|
Krowley posted:This movie did not have to be so god drat long I didn't really feel like the movie was too long. Spectre, on the other hand
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 05:05
|
|
|
of bees posted:I think the problem with making it one movie is that it would have had to be one LONG movie, like 3 and a half hours. So a compact, good 'mockingjay' is too long for one movie, but too short for two. I'm not familiar with the books themselves, but is the third book a particularly long or complex book compared to the other 2? What about the others edits down cleanly to 2 hours 20 minutesish while this required 2 movies? I'm more than willing to admit I was wrong but the decision strikes me as a harry potter-esque 'gotta get one more movie's worth of ticket sales from this baby.'
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 05:07
|
|
|
cat doter posted:I'm not familiar with the books themselves, but is the third book a particularly long or complex book compared to the other 2? What about the others edits down cleanly to 2 hours 20 minutesish while this required 2 movies? I'm more than willing to admit I was wrong but the decision strikes me as a harry potter-esque 'gotta get one more movie's worth of ticket sales from this baby.' Certain elements definitely benefit from having the longer run time. For example, Peeta being held hostage by the Capitol wouldn't have nearly the impact if he got rescued 45 minutes into the movie, nor would him redeeming himself after almost killing Katniss in this film have the same emotional weight. There are drawbacks, like everything with Prim feeling like "oh yeah most of her character development was in the last movie" but I think in general it was the right call and watching them back to back will have a better impact.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 05:21
|
|
|
It was pretty obvious when they had to resort to CG Philip Seymour Hoffman. And then repeatedly draw attention to that.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 05:37
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Certain elements definitely benefit from having the longer run time. For example, Peeta being held hostage by the Capitol wouldn't have nearly the impact if he got rescued 45 minutes into the movie, nor would him redeeming himself after almost killing Katniss in this film have the same emotional weight. Peeta was caught at the end of the second movie. If a main character being rescued early on works in Star Wars then it could work fine here as well. Never read the books but no way am I buying that they need 4-5 hours to tell the story (which is kinda weak compared to the first books as far as I hear). The decision to split the movies into two "epic" parts is an exec decision all the way. Just like with the hobbit, which was absolutely ruined with horrible pacing and bullshit filler content
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 10:56
|
|
|
Krowley posted:Peeta was caught at the end of the second movie. If a main character being rescued early on works in Star Wars then it could work fine here as well. If Han had gone crazy and tried to murder Leia, with a large part of the film being about Leia trying to trust Han again, you would have a point.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 14:36
|
|
|
computer parts posted:If Han had gone crazy and tried to murder Leia, with a large part of the film being about Leia trying to trust Han again, you would have a point. There are ways to make movies feel long and epic with meaningful character development, without bloating the runtime or splitting it up. It's been done many many times before. Mockingjay as a single two-hour movie could've easily worked, and we wouldn't have had to wait a year for a gimped part 1, and another year for an underwhelming part 2
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 15:24
|
|
|
Krowley posted:There are ways to make movies feel long and epic with meaningful character development, without bloating the runtime or splitting it up. It's been done many many times before. Mockingjay as a single two-hour movie could've easily worked, and we wouldn't have had to wait a year for a gimped part 1, and another year for an underwhelming part 2 You still haven't addressed my point. The character arc I mentioned is an integral part of the Mockingjay story. You don't even mention the ways to "make [a] movie feel long and epic", which is stunningly lazy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 15:43
|
|
|
Haha are you trying to escalate this into a slapfight or something? Got no time for that, so whatever
|
|
#
?
Nov 26, 2015 16:02
|
|
|
I think this was better, because instead of one decent movie made from a bad book, we got one very good movie and one below average movie out of a bad book. All in all I think that's a win.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2015 05:49
|
|
|
Saw it today, made sure to not re-read anything so I wouldn't complain during the movie. Overall I liked it. Didn't think PSH looked too weird in digital form. Love Donald Sutherland always, I thought this was his best out of the 4 movies.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2015 21:03
|
|
|
I guess I'm in the minority, but I thought it was great (I also loved all of the books). How fantastic to have a series aimed at teenagers that grapples with issues of child soldiers, PTSD, propaganda, and the games politicians play with human lives. By the end of the series, the best outcome for anyone was just being alive. Yes, older readers and viewers would see the ending coming quite easily, but it would be revolutionary for younger consumers--and a fascinating perspective nonetheless. To me, Suzanne Collins crafted a truly innovative trilogy about political manipulation. I do wish that the movies had gone as dark as the books: show the permanent scarring and deformities sustained by the survivors, and not gloss over the volatility of the relationship between Katniss and Peeta. Katniss chose Peeta--emotionally broken, still unsure of reality years into the future--because of an all-too-human mixture of craving, guilt, and despair. Her sister, her entire reason for her involvement in the games, is dead. Gale has been twisted into a terrible tool of the machine. Peeta is all she has left. Although I'm not a fan of the meadow scene and wish terribly that the movie had ended after the scene in bed, it's understandable why a Hollywood production would include it. And yes, the pacing needed work. So much kitchen sink. Overall, 4/5.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 06:54
|
|
|
MisterBibs posted:Right, I knew that, but it's hard for me to not think that someone didn't think "Have we considered that this might bite us in the rear end eventually?" Counterpoint: basically all of human history. cat doter posted:I'm not familiar with the books themselves, but is the third book a particularly long or complex book compared to the other 2? What about the others edits down cleanly to 2 hours 20 minutesish while this required 2 movies? I'm more than willing to admit I was wrong but the decision strikes me as a harry potter-esque 'gotta get one more movie's worth of ticket sales from this baby.' Everything - everything - was rushed as hell in the book. This isn't a case of "the last book should have only been one movie," it's a case of "the last book should have been two books."
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 14:50
|
|
|
Splitting Mockingjay into two parts makes sense because it has a Che Part 1 / Che Part 2 dynamic going on. Also, in this case, 'Che Part 2' is effectively a remake of Inception.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 18:06
|
|
|
turtlecrunch posted:Gail talk You mean near the end? That's explained by Snow like five minutes later. Great movie; terrible epilogue. Not knowing where to end has been a common theme with this series. I'm willing to bet if everything after Sutherland's final scene was condensed down to a quarter of the time with a voice over by Laurence, there would be a lot less complaints about the length of the movie. Also the crowd at my viewing were awful; there were alarm clocks going off, kids playing on their phone and at least three pictures taken of the screen, with flash.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 20:03
|
|
|
I felt like both "parts" of these movies legitimately had enough things going on to warrant two movies. Since Harry Potter End Movie Parts 1/2 happened it's now hip to criticize this move, but frankly almost every Harry Potter movie could have used two parts because Rowling's writing goes all over the place. The typical problem with a lot of comic/book adaptations in film is that they hack up a lot of content and tell it in a two-and-a-half-hour block, and that's really a breakneck pace in most cases.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2015 23:49
|
|
|
I thought the funniest part was when some combatants were blending in with refugees.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 02:12
|
|
|
OneThousandMonkeys posted:I felt like both "parts" of these movies legitimately had enough things going on to warrant two movies. Since Harry Potter End Movie Parts 1/2 happened it's now hip to criticize this move, but frankly almost every Harry Potter movie could have used two parts because Rowling's writing goes all over the place. The typical problem with a lot of comic/book adaptations in film is that they hack up a lot of content and tell it in a two-and-a-half-hour block, and that's really a breakneck pace in most cases. I think the major issue isn't that these need multiple films. The issue is that they don't want to cut, trim or alter material even though they really should. The Potter films suffer from being poorly planned out (due in no small part to not knowing the entirety of what is to come) but if they were remade it would be a lot wiser to cut material and do some serious editing rather than trying to be accurate to the books at the cost of bloat.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 04:21
|
|
|
Adlai Stevenson posted:I skipped Part 1 though (read the books already and didn't care at the time) and now I have a question. Is the whole propaganda angle as strong and interesting as SMG has said?
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2015 09:40
|
|
|
Does the movie keep Katniss putting an arrow into Julianne Moore and Sutherland choking to death laughing about it intact from the book?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 16:10
|
|
|
Wade Wilson posted:Does the movie keep Katniss putting an arrow into Julianne Moore and Sutherland choking to death laughing about it intact from the book? Pretty much Except Snow also gets mobbed by people, but you never really see him die. He spits up a fair bit of blood though.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2015 16:19
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:The surreal deathtrap stuff is pretty great, though. Yeah for real. I haven't seen Part I so I got nothing to compare the propaganda aspect, but outside of a few standout moments (e.g. Katniss getting three separate competing televised death announcements within five minutes of her alleged death) it mostly occupied the awkward space of not being quite on-the-nose enough to hit with a surreal impact. But the death traps were lovely, especially in the context of signalling a total breakdown of the "rules of war" and of the sense of narratability that allowed Katniss to function at least mostly effectively in this role that she hates and is terrible at. This is a movie where Boggs explains their mission as essentially, "We're going to take this elite unit into the city well behind the front lines, so there won't be actual fighting, except there are still enemy troops and death traps everywhere that will kill us. We can't go anywhere without this magic map because it tells us where the traps are, but it's also useless because we only know where some of the traps are, so we'll get killed by traps anyway." And then that all happens. It works well as a companion piece to your take on Spectre, I think. I also appreciate some of the subtler bits of propaganda imagery that isn't coming from the D13 side. My favorite is when they're all emerging from the sewer zone and they wordlessly run past a poster showing a grotesquely heroically-posed portrait of FINNICK ODAIR as a public threat. Which, of course, is true, what with a lionized conception of Finnick's unintentional martyrdom posing a major threat to Katniss's well-being.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 00:23
|
|
|
ImpAtom posted:I think the major issue isn't that these need multiple films. The issue is that they don't want to cut, trim or alter material even though they really should. The Potter films suffer from being poorly planned out (due in no small part to not knowing the entirety of what is to come) but if they were remade it would be a lot wiser to cut material and do some serious editing rather than trying to be accurate to the books at the cost of bloat. The problem is that for every time you make a cinematic choice that tells a smart, well-thought out part of the story, you'll have that many more fans and Tumblr wizards complaining loudly that the film wasn't a literal facsimile of the book.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 01:38
|
|
|
That was alright, probably the worst of the four but that isn't damning because it's a pretty decent set of movies all said. But none of the actors seemed to really be giving a poo poo in it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 01:53
|
|
|
Sarcastro posted:Everything - everything - was rushed as hell in the book. This isn't a case of "the last book should have only been one movie," it's a case of "the last book should have been two books." Interesting, I might have to give these another look then.
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 07:59
|
|
|
Vitamin P posted:That was alright, probably the worst of the four but that isn't damning because it's a pretty decent set of movies all said. But none of the actors seemed to really be giving a poo poo in it. Josh Hutcherson and Donald Sutherland seemed to care, about different things  Seriously, the best parts of the movie was any time Peta brought up how broken he had become or whenever President Snow did...anything. There was a deleted scene for part 1 where Snow is explaining what Peta will say on a broadcast and Snow seems all "Grandpa Snow knows what to do" about his delivery, and then Peta goes "what if I don't want to say that?" and President Snow drops his smile slightly and simply says "my boy, you do not have a choice" and then smiles again. Also, question for anyone who has read the books, do the mutts actually take out the Lt that easily? Because that was suuuuuuuch a lovely cliche that they used there, and even dumber since she is supposed to be an elite soldier
|
|
#
?
Dec 4, 2015 23:35
|
|
|
In the books, she stays behind with one of those sister soldiers at some point to cover a retreat, and gets killed off screen by either mutts or that grindy floor trap.
|
|
#
?
Dec 5, 2015 02:55
|
|
|
Prof. Moriarty posted:I guess I'm in the minority, but I thought it was great (I also loved all of the books). How fantastic to have a series aimed at teenagers that grapples with issues of child soldiers, PTSD, propaganda, and the games politicians play with human lives. Yeah, Ender's Game was a pretty good book.
|
|
#
?
Dec 18, 2015 00:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 18, 2024 05:33 |
|
|
Vitamin P posted:That was alright, probably the worst of the four but that isn't damning because it's a pretty decent set of movies all said. But none of the actors seemed to really be giving a poo poo in it. We saw it tonight and that was what I said, that Lawrence just phoned this entire film in.
|
|
#
?
Dec 29, 2015 07:13
|
|