|
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
|
|
way. They could've called it The Obvious Instrument Of The Inevitable Rebellion That Will Rise Against Us Games.
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 23, 2024 16:54 |
|
|
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?" 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
|
|
|
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
|
|