The Hunger Games Movie - True to the tale

MOVIE - THE DIFFERENCES

Since my original post on the first Hunger Games novel, I have completed the trilogy and seen the Hunger Games movie with my 19-year-old (who completed HG trilogy in a weekend!).  I have been grinding away at a review for over 2 weeks since.  It at last occurred to me why this has been so difficult.  Most of what I think about HG I have already said.  And, while turning a book into a movie often means compromises, with HG Movie the essence of the story is captured, even enhanced.  Where it leaves out subtle details of background and character, it gives full dimension to sounds and images.  It is one thing to read about the exotic appearance of capital citizens.  It is quite another to see on a big screen the vibrant, contrived individuals of the capital compared with the drab, downcast sameness of those in District 12 where the grit of coal dust seems to permeate everything.  In the book, Katniss is enthralled by the costuming and food, which makes her seem the immature teenager.  In the movie, much less time is devoted to those preparations, we see the end results.  Result: a more mature characterization of Katniss, especially given the gravity of her situation.

Of course, at some point, those sent to the arena have to start dying.  And when they do, it is shocking.  Still, compared to the descriptions in the book necessary to generate the same level of horror, the gore in the movie was minimized without diminishing the tension.

The biggest change from the book is that the movie audience does not live the story through the eyes, ears, mind and heart of Katniss.  We are only able to interpret Katniss based on her actions, which often seem very measured with occasional outbursts of passion, and her words, which are few.  It allows the other characters to be seen without the filter of Katniss' interpretations.  Rue is precious, magnifying the tragedy of her participation in the games.  President Snow, Effie Trinket, and Caesar were also particularly notable.  Katniss, though, is still central, and dominates not through force of first person narrative, but by a convincing portrayal of a deep resolve to persevere to an unknown end without becoming a tool of the Games.

SUPER GIRL?

Hunger Games gives a nod to the pervasive 'strong girl' cultural meme -- the compulsion to show women as able to compete physically with men.  The reality is much different.  In sports, world class women competitors are at the level of high school sophomore boys.  In the military and police, the rate of injury for women is much higher.  The chance of a female surviving The Hunger Games is actually quite remote.  Though Katniss scores the highest initial ranking and is the 'star' of the games, HG shows much of Katniss's survival is circumstantial - the 'tracker jackers', the tribune from D11 who saved her, Peeta's early diversions.  And, while competent, Katniss is limited and vulnerable.  That makes her believable, someone you hope can overcome the odds.  She is a benefactor of grace.

CENTRAL QUESTIONS STILL CENTRAL IN MOVIE

The same questions hovering over the book remain as The HG movie ends with the consequences of victory still uncertain for Katniss and Peeta.  What makes a person chose (as Katniss and Peeta do) to live or die for the sake of others rather than choose to survive at any cost?  Where does that will come from?  A message, if not THE message, of Hunger Games is that there are people and causes worth dying for and even if your cause fails, the attempt is worth the cost.  Watching The Hunger Games, I was reminded of this by Malcolm Muggeridge: "…we are given the choice of Love or power.  The way of Love is the way of the Cross."  (Confessions of a Twentieth-Century Pilgrim).

President Snow's observation on hope was telling.  For those in power, a little hope for 'the masses' is good, too much is dangerous.  What is it that people yearn for, hope for?  Which raises a question for the real world: Are we feeding our children into a hopeless system where image and entertainment are more important than meaningful relationships and true purpose?  Where adults look on while children are destroying each other or destroying themselves?  What proportion of the world's children would even have the time to consider the importance of a book or movie in the context of the bitter day-to-day struggle for food, shelter, survival?

SHOULD YOU SEE THE MOVIE?

There is considerable angst among Christian movie reviewers over whether Hunger Games will push, pull or lead 'young people' in a bad direction.  Have we read the same Bible?  It is full of violence and betrayal and sin and darkness.  Of course, there is also hope and forgiveness and redemption.  But what Christian has not been in the position of Peter or Judas and to some degree betrayed their Savior and felt the same despair?  Should we leave out the story of Judas or the book of Judges or half the stories in Genesis?

I see much more integrity in those few brave souls who feel that as followers of Jesus they cannot waste precious time indulging in movies or other trivialities.  They see both 'entertainment industry' and 'Christian movie reviewer' as oxymorons.  And I admire their stance.  Deep down, to my dismay, I suspect they are right.  

However, if like me, you have already  ingrained yourself in the habit of a family movie night or are trying to connect with the cultural influences of a younger generation, then by all means, see The Hunger Games.  See it with a teenager or several.  Have the discussion about violence and betrayal and sin and darkness and hope and forgiveness and redemption and the way of Love and Who it is that shows us that way.