16 Reasons to See Hunger Games This Weekend

Happy Hunger Games!

If you weren't one of the one million people who saw the film at midnight last night and are wrestling with whether or not to go this weekend, here are my 16 reasons why you should make a point to make the trek out to your local theater and catch the film as soon as possible.

Jennifer Lawrence

Not only is Jennifer Lawrence the perfect Katniss (I take back all my naysaying!) who nails her internal struggles, telling us everything we need to know with her eyes, but as a person, she is one of those rare gems we need more of in this industry. Self-effacing, real, honest and unafraid, she has the potential to become one of the definitive great actresses of the next generation and here is the film that will catapult her into stardom. Seeing the movie both supports her career, and grants you the pleasure of watching her embody the iconic Katniss Everdeen inside and out.

To support films with female leads

They say films with a female lead generally can't open, no matter how often the mysterious "they" may be proven wrong. So continue to support strong leading roles for women by throwing your weight behing Hunger Games.

Katniss is the role model young women need

Unlike the lead in a certain other young adult series cum film franchise, Katniss' purpose isn't to simply be with a man, but rather  protect her family and *all* of the people she loves. She is fueled by keeping her promises and doing what is right, via wit, reasoning, and courage, despite her fears and insecurities. She may be a teenage girl, somewhat broken by poverty & war, who at times makes irrational decisions, as you do, but ultimately, her heart is in the right place and she exhibits all the qualities of someone we actually root for and want to succeed. Please prefer Katniss over Bella, future daughter. I beg of you.

Relevant

Author of the books and co-writer of the screenplay, Suzanne Collins, has been very open in talking about where her idea for Hunger Games came from. Yes, it all goes back to greek mythology ultimately, but the specifics came from flipping back and forth between war footage and reality television. Is the future we see in the Hunger Games really that much of a stretch? There are enough similarities in the world we see in the book and film to make it almost tangible, and thus all the more frightening. The series is ultimately about the awful truths of war, a war that is painted over, made to look pretty, disguised as something entertaining, as something necessary, as something we should be honored to be a part of. Collins does a great job of drawing us in, only to rip the rug out from under us. The film does a great job of beginning this journey at an extremely appropriate time in our history.

Josh Hutcherson

I doubted him. Boy did I doubt him. But that face! That sweet, expressive, totally in love face! Although I thought the character didn't get to do quite enough, I thought Hutcherson stepped up to the plate with gusto in order to nail what material he was given. The brief moment when he looks out the window and loses it while leaving District 12? The thoughts running through his head when he says he doesn't want to forget? The way he looks at Katniss ALL of the time?! Well done, Hutcherson. You have officially won me over.

To be a part of the conversation (potential spoiler alert)

I liked the movie. A lot. I also have some problems with it, namely the short shrift the Katniss/Peeta relationship gets. Not because I'm girling out and wanted a better makeout scene (but also, I am and I did), but because even though I understand certain areas had to be emphasized and other areas had to be deemphasized in order to properly set up the series' enormous tone shift of a final installment, putting Katniss' relationship with Peeta so far in the background takes away a lot of what the first book so wonderful and potentially harms the impact of certain events in book two and three. My ultimate theory is this will be fixed in book two, but, for those of who don't know what I'm talking about - don't you kind of want to? I want to debate! I want to see who feels similarly! Who agrees, who disagrees, who liked the movie and who didn't, and the long list of reasons why. If you don't see the movie, you will immediately be in the minority, especially if you are in the entertainment industry, and this is an *exciting* conversation to be able to partake in.

Maintains the integrity of the work

It's pretty rare that a movie so captures the tone and atmosphere of its source material the way Hunger Games does, and although it's not a word for word adaptation and many parts do get truncated, what the film gets right, it gets perfectly, and anything that is wrong seems to have a reasonable explanation. Everyone involved in the making of the film wouldn't have it any other way, and shouldn't we be supporting that when we can? The film was not dumbed down and did not placate to the Twilight audience. Quite the opposite in fact, as I mentioned above.

So you can tell Jeff Wells what's what

He said you can't trust female reviewers of the movie and that essentially the only right answer is that the film is stupid because it alters itself to be more appealing to teen girls. This is so far from the truth or sense of any kind, that it makes me want to scream. Scream with me, won't you?

Elizabeth Banks

Thank goodness Banks campaigned so damn hard for this role. She is perfection, bringing in roughly 95% of the laughs in the film with her overly enthusiastic and forgivably snippy line readings. There is an authenticity Banks brings to the role with ease that I can't image other actresses fans considered, such as Kristin Chenoweth, could bring to the table.

Maybe it'll make you rent/buy Battle Royale?

One can always hope, right? PS - if you *wanted*, you could buy your new blu-ray of Battle Royale right here :)

Music

Okay, so this isn't really a reason to see the movie, but more a reason to buy the soundtrack. It's fantastic. Rock, appalachian, americana, alt-county, but all with a unifying sense of "We send our children into an arena to kill each other." Artists include personal favorites Low Anthem, The Civil Wars, Glen Hansard, The Secret Sisters and Arcade Fire, and that's just to name a few. Three of these songs play over the closing credits. So hey, that totally counts as a reason to see the movie after all! Huzzah!

Successful World Building

If you appreciate solid production design, costumes, hair, makeup, art direction and so on, you will get a huge kick out of Panem and everyone in it. The capitol is decked out in bright colors and outrageous accoutrements, each citizen a feast for the eyes. Meanwhile, District 12 represents the polar opposite, existing in seemingly another era, much more Appalacia of the 1800s then the flamboyantly variegated landscape of the distant future. While both areas are completely different, they still feel as though they exist in the same universe - not an easy feat. Overall, the movie is an undeniable treat for design junkies, however you may feel about any other part of it.

Caeser Flickerman

Stanley Tucci is aces in the role of Caeser Flickerman, completely encompassing what the "host" of the Hunger Games would really be like. He is a slightly more sinister Ryan Seacrest with blue hair and no apologies and watching Tucci have a ball with the role is a hoot.

Relate to the kids!

So I don't have kids or work with kids anymore, and frankly still kind of consider myself a kid, but if finding ways to relate to the youth is of importance to you, seeing Hunger Games will certainly help. Be the open parent that goes with your kids and discusses it afterward, or the hip parent that can impress your kids' friends with your insight and knowledge into their beloved franchise. Here is something you and your pre-teens/teens can enjoy together, that is potentially so important to them, that anything associated with it will create a long lasting and important memory.

It's even better the second time!

Anything that bothered me the first time melted away upon a second viewing, allowing me to truly dive in to the small, but crucial moments between Katniss and Peeta, and really take in every clue about how their relationship turns out post Hunger Games during the rushed ending. Once you're past the first viewing when you spend most of your time judging, you can settle in and let yourself absorb how solid the adaptation really is. But to get to a second time, there must be a first.

To be a part of the phenomenon

One million pre-sale tickets for a midnight show doesn't happen very often. As we've touched on, these ticket sales are for a film based on a book, written by a woman, with a *strong* female lead character, that doesn't compromise the ultimate point of the series or integrity of the story by dumbing it down for audiences, with an incredible soundtrack and spot on performances. Don't pass up the opportunity to see it during all of the excited fervor. Anticipation and quality rarely match up so heartily and it would be a shame to miss out on experiencing it properly. See full post

Armie Hammer, Finnick Odair And The Fan Hive Mind

Cross-posted on Film.com

Casting fan favorite properties has always been a beloved past time of mine, and I know I'm not alone. Especially when it comes to expansive universes (Game of Thrones) or casts that need actors of such a specific age that the best folks for the job are in constant rotation (Marvel's Runaways). Growing up in a media heavy environment, I am one of those folks whose brain tends to cast an actor immediately, if possible, to aid with the storytelling process when I'm reading. I know fans who disagree with this notion and don't even see adaptations so as not to tarnish their personal vision of who the characters are. Although I don't function that way, I admire that staunch loyalty to the written word. But for the fans out there who live to see something they love brought alive on the big screen, casting is major, and it's rare that we all universally agree that it has been done correctly. Even though most Captain America fans are on board with Chris Evans now, that was certainly not the case when he signed on. Same with Jennifer Lawrence as Katniss in the Hunger Games.

Which brings me the strange Hive Mind experience that occurred as I was finally reading Catching Fire this past week. There I was imagining Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Huchinson, Elizabeth Banks, Woody Harrelson, Donald Sutherland in their respective roles, doing a great job, surrounded by mostly faceless blobs representing the other characters, my brain not finding it necessary to cast anyone particular yet, when all of a sudden I got to the character of Finnick Odair. The dashing charmer with a touch of cheese, the prince charming-ish looker who everyone assumes is a player, the classically beautiful golden skinned hunk. For some reason, my brain immediately went to Armie Hammer. Armie Hammer? He doesn't necessarily have golden skin. He certainly doesn't have bronze hair, though I suppose that could be fixed. But my mind had made its decision. Finnick would be played by Armie Hammer in my imagination and nothing could stop that. So I continued reading. And man, was Armie good. His build was perfect, so tall and muscular, his voice and eyes seamlessly making the transition from smooth and pompous to genuine and heroic. It felt so right in my bones.

So naturally, I took to Twitter to see what other people thought. Simply asking the question "Who did everyone cast as Finnick when reading Catching Fire?" and I was surprised to see multiple people respond, you guessed it, Armie Hammer. This was baffling to me. He doesn't really have golden skin or bronze hair. And yet so many of us went straight to his face. And then, the kicker. I was directed to this Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/ArmieForFinnick. Yes, that's right. Completely unbeknownst to me when I randomly cast Armie Hammer as Finnick, there is already a Facebook movement going to get him cast. Not only that, but any Finnick page I could manage to get to while still avoiding spoilers, had Hammer in the profile picture or taking up a lot of space in the "Who should play him" section, easily more so than anyone else.

What does this all MEAN? Why did so many of us see someone, THIS someone, in this role immediately? Mirror Mirror, in which Hammer plays a prince, hasn't come out yet, and even if it had, when we first meet Finnick, we don't think of him as a genuine hero, we think of him as kind of smarmy. It's not like Hammer's role in The Social Network had anything in common with Finnick except, what, being popular? Normally if something like this happens, it's at least because the actor in question had just played a role of the exact same type. But this is not the case here.

To me, this is no doubt an example of the Hive Mind. Of course, unlike the Borg, we fans have our own individual identities and lives, but somehow, in this particular case, our brains linked up and decided collectively who should play the role of Finnick Odair in The Hunger Games. In all my years of being a fan and fantasy casting, something this peculiar and specific has never occurred before. The closest I've seen is Zach Levi circa Chuck season one for Yorick in Y: The Last Man, but that was because Chuck practically *was* Yorick, and in any event, that ship has long sailed. Perhaps none of this seems that bizarre or interesting to you, readers, but experiencing all of this myself hasn't happened before and I think it's pretty damn cool.

So this leaves me with one simple plea to whoever is casting Catching Fire. Though he may not seem totally right for the role, I encourage you to at least audition Armie Hammer for Finnick Odair. You don't want to see the Fan Hive Mind angry. See full post

The Hunger Games and Jennifer Lawrence: Is This Going To Work?

Commissioned by and crossposted on Film.com



On the heels of the announcement that Jennifer Lawrence won the role of Katniss in The Hunger Games has come a lot of discussion as to whether or not the naturally blond, 20 year old actress is right for the role of the 16 year old, olive skinned brunette. Many fans (mostly purists, natch) are complaining that Lawrence is poor casting for these reasons. But how much does it matter that Lawrence is four years older and has the wrong complexion? Is it really warranting all this uproar?

I too was bothered when I first heard the announcement, but not because of Lawrence's hair or hue of skin, the cosmetic aspects aren't a huge deal as far as I'm concerned, they can be altered easily. What did made me uncomfortable was her age. Part of what made The Hunger Games so harrowing for me to read was imagining a 16 year old - a Nicola Peltz, a Hailee Steinfeld, someone who is young enough to still *look* like an actual teen - forced into Katniss' situation. Part of the reason the upcoming Hanna is so effective is because the teen assassin is played by a 16 year old. It's difficult, yet thrilling to watch. Imagining the images coming alive as I read, I feared for Katniss, was amazed with Katniss, wanted to protect Katniss. Casting a 20 year old, even a 20 year old who just played a 17 year old, as Lawrence did in Winter's Bone, immediately does away with all of that. When I imagine Jennifer Lawrence in the part, I am suddenly not concerned for Katniss' safety, I'm not questioning her ability or moved by the fact that someone so young only knows how to do what she can do because of the poverty she was raised in that forced her to grow up so quickly. Instead, I see a woman. A young looking woman, sure, but a woman nonetheless.


However, these were the thoughts I had when I had only read two thirds of The Hunger Games.

A few days after the announcement that Lawrence got the part, I sat down to finish The Hunger Games with only part three of the first book, entitled "The Victor," to go. And boy did that change things. Imagining Lawrence and rumored contender, Hunter Parrish, in the roles of Katniss and Peeta during the last third of the book just about sealed the deal for me that when it comes to casting, The Hunger Games may not in fact be an epic fail. The Jennifer Lawrence and Hunter Parrish in my mind have *amazing* chemistry, you guys. And it made me think of something no dissenters seem to be discussing.

While casting actual teenagers would certainly provide an audience with that unique, frightening feeling of seeing children, more or less, forced into an awful situation like the hunger games, something important would be lost: the relationship between Katniss and Peeta. The sexuality. The romance. The chemistry. The maturity. It's the reason all "teen" shows are cast with twenty somethings. No one wants to watch an actual fifteen year old make out with another fifteen year old. That's when something that should be exciting to see come to fruition becomes sweet at best, child porn at worst. Do you really think there would be however-many-thousand videos dedicated to the kisses of Chuck and Blair if the roles were played by high school juniors? Are you telling me you don't feel even a little dirty watching the younger characters on Skins? How many people are going to watch 90210 if the "hot new sophomore" who sleeps with someone's thirty year old sister is an actual sophomore? Have you seen an actual high school sophomore lately? If sexuality is important for the characters to posses, the casting will skew slightly older, plain and simple.

I didn't realize how important chemistry would be until finishing the first book, but now I can't imagine having anyone younger than eighteen in the role, and even most eighteen year olds look too young for me to want to watch them have chemistry with anyone. Even Logan Lerman, who I think is adorbz town central, has too much of a baby face for me to want to see him in any sort of sexual situation. In a few years, sure, but not right now. And I can safely say I do *not* want The Hunger Games film to shy away from the violence or the romance.

Which brings me to Katniss' counterpart. Obviously if our leading lady is to be played by an actress slightly older than teenage years with a maturity way beyond teenage years, the actor playing Peeta must have a similar sensibility. Lawrence's casting immediately rules out actors too much younger than she is. Aside from Hunter Parrish, Alex Pettyfer is apparently under consideration. But let's nip that in the bud before producers put an offer out, shall we? While Jennifer Lawrence is blond and no longer a teenager, everything else about her is Katniss. We know she can be tough, we know she can be vulnerable, we know she can look like dreck, we know she can look drop dead gorgeous, we know she can skin an animal and we know she can cry. And to hear the way director Gary Ross talks about her audition, you know Lawrence will bring it and subsequently kill it. Still not convinced? Here's an except from author Suzanne Collins' letter on the casting, published in EW (If you've read the first book, read the rest of the spoiler-tastic letter here),

“Jennifer’s just an incredible actress. So powerful, vulnerable, beautiful, unforgiving and brave. I never thought we’d find somebody this amazing for the role. And I can’t wait for everyone to see her play it.”

Which is why I worry about all this Pettyfer talk. The ALREADY notorious jerkface (trying to keep my language clean here), after only TWO studio films, could not be more wrong for the role of Peeta. Pettyfer reads as mean as he is rumored to be, as well as cold, stiff and humorless, the opposite of everything Peeta is supposed to embody. And despite being three years younger than competition Hunter Parrish, he looks about five years older. Let me tell you, the Jennifer Lawrence and Alex Pettyfer in my head have zero chemistry. Zip. And if we're going the route of casting slightly older so the audience is invested in the romance, whether or not this film will work now relies entirely on who gets cast as Peeta.

I like the idea of Parrish so much because of his natural warmth and sweet sexuality. He isn't classically handsome, he's unique, bridging on goofy, but tall, built and good-natured, exuding sort of a "you simultaneously want to make out with me and cuddle me" sort of vibe. I can buy the necessary vulnerability and I can buy the necessary snark. Blandy McDoucherson Alex Pettyfer? Not so much.

With a movie like say, Let the Right One In and its American take, Let Me In, casting actual 12-14 year olds was essential because the film hinged on the vampire trope of an older soul stuck in a pre-adolescent body. At the start of Marvel's Runaways, most of the characters are 15 and while there is a kiss between two of them at one point, sure, the important relationships don't happen until a bit later, so there is some freedom to actually go the young route, to see what it looks like when real teens are fighting super villains and let them grow into young adults with feelings and sexuality and romance over the course of the films a la Harry Potter. But because so much of the first Hunger Games book really does focus on the relationship between Katniss and Peeta, I ultimately am in support of this casting and recommend re-reading the book with them in mind. You may be surprised with how naturally you can imagine them in the roles.

So to answer the question if this going to work, I say if it doesn't, Jennifer Lawrence won't be the reason. Her casting is actually a great sign that despite the fact that The Hunger Games is technically a Young Adult novel, this movie will be leaning more on the side of an adult sensibility than that of kids or tweens. Now we just have to cross our fingers and hope the rest of the casting falls into place. And you know, the script and direction and production design and special effects....But I'm optimistic for now.

What do you think of Jennifer Lawrence at Katniss? Who would be your preference for Peeta? Looking forward to your thoughts, readers. See full post