Gabrielle Reviews: The Hunger Games

This is what you get when you watch too many survival shows. It doesn't help that our economy and leaders are in the gutter either. How do we fix this problem? It's simple. We make our children kill each other. What fun!

The Hunger Games has many ups and downs. There are parts where it satisfies, and others where it does not. I mean, it's hard to make a movie perfect. However, it's often especially hard to make a movie perfect in a sense that it is close to the book. Now, I'll admit. I only read a bit of the book before seeing the movie, so there isn't a whole lot I can compare. I will try to sum up the films strongest and weakest points based on what I saw.

Let's start with the strengths of the film.

I felt the movie had great settings. The way they had everything from the slums, to the Capitol, to the wilderness was excellent. It was obvious that the world had changed quite a bit in the passed years since what we have currently today.

Another thing that the movie does well is the overall character development. Katniss really grew during the movie. She knew that she had to stay calm in her situation, and the way she stayed by Rue's side when she had passed away and took care of her was emotional and beautiful. Other characters, like Haymitch and Peeta were also well-executed.

Now, of course, a movie will often have its weaknesses.

I felt that it was a shame that the overall time spent in the wilderness was to short. I really wish we could have seen more fight scenes. Then again, a majority of the characters did die at the very beginning of the actual games, both in the film and in the book.

Other than this one flaw, the rest of the movie was actually very enjoyable. This was one of the biggest movies of 2012; and it really deserves the praise that it got from fans and critics. I'd recommend it to anyone who can handle some violence as well as heart-warming or heart-wrenching scenes.

I give the film a 3.5 out of 5 stars.

Utopia and Dystopia: The Matrix and The Hunger Games

After watching both The Matrix and The Hunger Games, I can say that both have proved to be great examples of Utopia/ Dystopia. The big question is: "How do the two films compare or contrast to one another?"

Both films use a strong sense of restricted freedom. In The Matrix, the humans are being kept in pods and are being taught to fight and bring use to their abilities. In the Hunger Games, the twelve districts must survive off of little to no resources or food. The Capitol takes two children, one boy and one girl, from each district and places them in the wilderness to fight until one victor is standing. The district that the victor is from will then get supplies and food to feed its people for up to a year. In the end, The Hunger Games, however, manages to pull off the restricted freedom role much easier.

Another major comparison of the two films is the use of surveillance against our characters. Neo always seemed to be followed by the enemy during The Matrix. He would either be forced to fight or to run and return to the ship. Katniss, as well as the other tributes in The Hunger Games, were being carefully watched as they fought each other to the death. Every time a character would die, the Capital could send out little signals to the other players, informing them of those who had died and who remained.

However, the only real difference between both films would be the nature of the two worlds. The Matrix did control earth in some ways, though it wasn't being destroyed. Nobody knew about it except for a few people, such as Neo. In The Hunger Games, however, the children are placed in the wilderness to survive on their own. If they had already known a little about being out in certain terrain, then maybe they would had survived easier. Katniss had wandered out many times to hunt, which gave her an advantage against the other players.