Probably the greatest achievement of The Hunger Games, and there are many, is that in adapting a phenomenally successful teen novel its creative team have produced something that works as a film, not just as an adaptation of a book. There’s no required reading before entering the cinema in order to ‘get it’, and it’s well above the ‘all your favourite bits but with pictures’ business that has become the accepted standard. When a series has sold millions of copies, as Suzanne Collins’ trilogy has, the default position is to produce something that will look just as readers imagined, to show what we were all thinking, rather than offer something nobody had considered. The Hunger Games as a novel has been dissected, expanded and retooled into something intelligent, immersive and powerfully current.
The world of Panem, a futuristic America, is established elegantly in about 90 seconds. First we see two men discussing an event called The Hunger Games in front of an audience; both men evidently so luxuriating in time and money that they can tint and trim every inch of their surface until they resemble painted couture clowns. Then, with a literal scream, we cut to District 12, where all is grey and people dress like the cast of a regional stage production of Little House On The Prairie. This is how Panem is divided. There are the haves and the have-nots. The haves live in The Capitol, amid great wealth and power. The have-nots live in a series of impoverished districts, put under oppressive rule after a failed uprising some time in the indefinite past. Each year two of every district’s youngest members are selected to battle to the death in an arena, from which one will emerge victorious for... no real reason. The poor will do as they are told, however senseless, and the rich will keep on keeping on. The echoes of the 99%ers are clear and not unintended.
This world bleeds with a cruelty from which director Gary Ross never retreats. Even luxury is portrayed as almost oppressive — gluttonous and requiring constant effort. Our heroine, Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence), is introduced hunting a cute little deer — typically movie shorthand for a complete monster. She has no time for being wistful because she has to survive. This runs right through the film: what is survival worth? Lawrence is perfect as Katniss. There’s very little softness about her, more a melancholy determination that good must be done even if that requires bad things. She stretches many of the tightly anguished muscles built in Winter’s Bone — the District 12 scenes have a similar hard-bitten feel — plus some other more traditionally gym-honed ones.
The violence and cruelty is most explicit in the Hunger Games arena, a vast, synthetic forest where 24 children hunt each other, and the level of brutality is very smartly done. You don’t get a rating suitable for a teenage audience by gutting preteens or decorating the landscape with their blood. So Ross cuts around it. The constantly searching, handheld camerawork used throughout the film comes in most useful during moments of violence, flashing round the action and making you think you’ve seen everything without ever really clocking anything that would upset your appetite.
It’s an old trick but a very effective one. The only clumsy element of these scenes is an intermittent commentary provided by Stanley Tucci and Toby Jones, which fills in incidental story details in a brash ‘Basil Exposition’ way. When it pops up, it kills the momentum.
In the future all wars have ended, but famine and poverty still remain in a new North Amercia, which has been split into 12 Districts. To appease the people, and pay tribute to the fallen, Capitol City have devised The Hunger Games, in which 2 children from each District are chosen to fight to the death live on TV.
The film follows the fortunes of the two chosen from District 12, and we see them whisked off to Capitol City - a pastel coloured "Willy Wonka" style place in which the people wear outlandish costumes, have bizarre haircuts and live seemingly empty and decedent lives. Here they are treated like royalty, and trained in readiness for the games.
Eventually the children are pitted against each other and the game begin. It is here that the film begins to remind one of the Japanese classic of a few years back 'Battle Royale' - but without as much blood or violence. As the game progresses the rules begin to change to attain an ending which is pleasing to the masses, rather than those "playing" the game, and new elements are thrown in to ensure excitement and "fun" for the viewers.
The film takes a long time to really hit its stride - the opening sequences seemingly go on forever - and there is no doubt that this film owes a big debt to 'Battle Royale', as well as nods to the original 'Rollerball' (in as much as war has been outlawed and violence has become controlled and organised for the entertainment of the masses) and even 'Logans Run', but it has enough in it to make it a stand-up, worthwhile film in its own right. Not the least of these is the way in which TV is shown to become cynical and exploitative, where - in much the same way as the Ancient Romans had their "Blood and Circuses" - love and death are merely elements in mass entertainment.
The production is very good - the future Capitol City looks amazing - whilst the acting ranges from excellent (the young actress playing the lead role is very good), to screen chewing (Woody Harrleson eats his heart out!!). The other thing about the film is its length - at almost 2hours 30minutes there is no doubt that it is just too long! A good half hour could have been lost without losing any of the tension or drama. Worth seeing definitely, but make sure you watch it in a comfortable cinema (or else take a cushion!)