The Hunger Games - Part 2

[Sentinel X]

yeah you all have to admit that it is funny that they hired a healthy chubby girl for a character that is very thin . in hollywood where they are all skinny.

Is Jennifer Lawrence chubby? ....I mean she has a naturally round face, so do many people, but I wouldn't call her chubby.

 

[Sith Scotti]

Is Jennifer Lawrence chubby? ....I mean she has a naturally round face, so do many people, but I wouldn't call her chubby.

She isn't hollywood skinny , which is refreshing ,. A woman needs some meat on them ...

 

[danoyse]

Hunger Games Review

The Hunger Games is a teen action movie set in a dystopian future that acts as a commentary of today’s society, specifically the Occupy Wall Street movement with the poor (99%) against the rich (1%) alongside today’s pop culture sensation with reality television where people compete against others for fame & riches. The nation Panem has twelve districts, with the first two being the utter rich and the rest becoming more middle class to ultimately the very poor where people are forced to hunt squirrels and berries for mere survival. The Hunger Games itself is a gladiator survival match where two people (male & woman) are randomly picked from each district into the battle zone and only one may leave it alive.

Our protagonist Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) hails from the utter poor district 12 as the symbolic figure of the 99% alongside with Robin Hood symbolism her weapon of choice the bow & arrow. She is a survivor, beautiful, wise and utterly pure, nothing is wrong with her and the poor people as they are the heroes, they are the ones the audience has to root and cheer for, only the poor receive any positive light whatsoever in this film.

What about the rich then? The fashion for the rich is not any commentary on today’s fashion, but it seems to be very Lady Gaga inspired with people going over the top colors and crazy make up, it felt like the 1960s when color televisions became mainstreamed and people started wearing bright colors to show their clothing off instead of the bland grey and white. However the main point about the rich (or well, the evil 1% Wall Street people) is that they have no redeeming qualities. The rich are selfish, amoral, cruel and absolutely corrupt, some are even flat out insane, but the movie represents not a single good willed person, but simply that the rich are evil and the poor are good. Am I supposed to take this seriously? How one sighted and utterly pessimistic view is this?

Occupy Wall Street started last year. The Hunger Games was first published in 2008. So it's not an allegory, at least that was never the intention when it was first written, and I believe the movie started production before that movement started last year.

None of the districts in Panem is rich. The Capitol is rich, but it's not a district. All of the districts are poor and are controlled by the Capitol, which is why all of the 12 districts need to turn over two kids for the Hunger Games.

The difference between the first two districts are that they actually train their kids to be part of the Hunger Games, which made their tributes to be the more dangerous challengers. They weren't richer or more well off than any of the other districts.

The point wasn't that the rich are immoral. The people in the Capitol weren't so heartless because they were rich, it was because their own media played the games in such a way that they only understood them as sport. Their goverment dressed up a punishment as a fashion show as a game without showing any of the cruelty it actually was, so they simply didn't understand, or didn't try to.

You could argue that the people in the districts also believed that everyone in the capitol was a soulless bastard, but Katniss and Peeta learn that they aren't that way by choice, it's just that both sides simply don't understand how the other side works. That's a realization that continues into the rest of the series.

Neither the movie or the book made the point that the rich are evil.

 

[danoyse]

Is Jennifer Lawrence chubby? ....I mean she has a naturally round face, so do many people, but I wouldn't call her chubby.

She's not chubby. People are just stupid.

Plus, Katniss shouldn't be a stick figure. While she never had an abundance of food, she and Gale did enough illegal hunting she wasn't starving, either.

And Peeta lived in a bakery. He ate enough too.

 

[dark_b]

you call me stupid? a guy who has JL as the avatar and praised her for winters bone and Hunger Games? a guy who is for 5 years saying that hollywood actors are to skinny and that that JL looks healthy?

of course she is healthy cubby.

 

[danoyse]

you call me stupid? a guy who has JL as the avatar and praised her for winters bone and Hunger Games? a guy who is for 5 years saying that hollywood actors are to skinny and that that JL looks healthy?

of course she is healthy cubby.

I didn't call you anything. I'm calling the entire argument that's permeated the internet that somehow this girl is fat, chubby, or otherwise overweight utterly stupid.

 

[dark_b]

but its still not stupid to talk about her weight. she doesnt look like other actors. she stands out. and because of that they talk about her.

 

[bullets]

I didn't know there was such thing as healthy chubby. I think she has the ideal figure. Hollywood would prefer a disgusting frail body.

 

[C. Lee]

but its still not stupid to talk about her weight. she doesnt look like other actors. she stands out. and because of that they talk about her.

I think that the media....who makes a concerted effort to predominately showcase skinny people in a good light and heavier people in a bad light....are stupid to continue the talk. All they do is cause grief for people.

 

[dark_b]

its great that Jennifer is a good actor and she is now becoming a big name. she is right now in a position to make a ibg difference how skinny girls are.

if she will lose weight because of the pressure then its over..........its all over. anyone remember Lea Michele from season 1?

 

[danoyse]

I think that the media....who makes a concerted effort to predominately showcase skinny people in a good light and heavier people in a bad light....are stupid to continue the talk. All they do is cause grief for people.

Exactly.

 

[ThePowerCosmic]

Gary Ross Leaves 'The Hunger Games' Franchise, Won't Direct 'Catching Fire' Sequel

While this morning it was reported that Lionsgate and Fox worked out their scheduling issues to allow Jennifer Lawrence to shoot "Catching Fire" and the "X-Men: First Class" sequel essentially back-to-back, it looks like before cameras can start rolling on "The Hunger Games" sequel this fall, the studio will need to find a director. The Playlist has learned that Gary Ross has officially exited the franchise and will not direct the sequel, formally giving Lionsgate and Summit his notice earlier this week, that he will not be coming back.
Though recent trade reports have spun the story as being an issue mostly about money, that's pretty much a small part of the motivation. Ross has never been a filmmaker that repeats himself (going from satire in "Pleasantville" to horse racing drama in "Seabiscuit" and action in "The Hunger Games") and we're told the burning desire simply isn't there to spend another couple of years with Katniss in the Capitol (evidently, he also liked the first book best). And while the lowball salary offer probably didn't help, Ross already has a fairly lucrative career as a screenwriter (and rewriter) and money isn't really the issue. Simply put, the filmmaker is looking to change things up for this next effort.

While the details on what that project will be are still coming together, we're told it will be something he has written that (ironically) will earn him a better payday that he would've received on "Catching Fire." Essentially, it's a win-win for Ross, who gets to move on to a project he developed for his fourth feature, and will allow him to do something different.

The hunt will be on to find a replacement soon. "Catching Fire" shoots this fall and will open on November 22, 2013.

Source

 

[Drizzle]

Hopefully they go for a new director who doesn't like shaky-cam.

 

[flash13]

I hope they get someone like Alfonso Cuaron and not Catherine Hardwicke.

 

[Carnage27]

I'm totally cool with this. Less shaky cam, please.

 

[mclay18]

I hope they get someone like Alfonso Cuaron and not Catherine Hardwicke.

Getting someone like Cuaron would be a pipe dream. But at least he isn't a fan of handheld cameras.

The thing is, Lionsgate will have to get someone cheap and can deliver a solid film. And someone who works fast...

 

[TheBlueMcCoy82]

Kind of glad Gary is out. No more shaky cams hopefully. Get Sam Raimi!

 

[dark_b]

I hope they get someone like Alfonso Cuaron and not Catherine Hardwicke.

but she directed the first twilight and not the second.

 

[Liam_H]

Kind of surprised they couldn't hammer out a deal but I guess Lionsgate didn't want to pony up.

 

[Marvin]

Just like Twilight and Potter, I don't see why anyone is surprised by this. These franchises are bigger than their directors. Moreover the first installment almost always as the weakest direction.

Personally, I didn't see what Ross brought the the material didn't provide. The acting/actors are the real stars if anything. I hope the next director isn't a fan of the made for tv looking capital city.

 

[Carnage27]

Kind of surprised they couldn't hammer out a deal but I guess Lionsgate didn't want to pony up.

Sounds like money was the smallest issue. Ross has only made like 3 movies in the past decade, and jumping right into a sequel less than a year after the first was released probably didn't appeal to him all that much.

 

[Blue Sugar]

This is bad news, I thought Ross did a great job with this film, would have loved seeing him return for both sequels. And the hate towards handheld camera-work here is really astounding. I really hope the next director doesn't ditch that completely or the overall slightly gritty feeling in the cinematography. If they make it too stylish or even think about 3D I will be mad.

There is always a chance they will get someone great but in my opinion there is a bigger chance they won't. Cuaron would be awesome though.

 

[Blue Sugar]

Just like Twilight and Potter, I don't see why anyone is surprised by this. These franchises are bigger than their directors. Moreover the first installment almost always as the weakest direction.

Personally, I didn't see what Ross brought the the material didn't provide. The acting/actors are the real stars if anything. I hope the next director isn't a fan of the made for tv looking capital city.

You are aware that the acting is directed by the director?

And personally I thought the Capitol looked fine, sure the CGI wasn't always top notch but that's more of a budget issue than a director one.

 

[Carnage27]

This is bad news, I thought Ross did a great job with this film, would have loved seeing him return for both sequels. And the hate towards handheld camera-work here is really astounding. I really hope the next director doesn't ditch that completely or the overall slightly gritty feeling in the cinematography. If they make it too stylish or even think about 3D I will be mad.

You can do gritty without sacrificing the audience's ability to tell up from down.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Hopefully they go for a new director who doesn't like shaky-cam.

I didn't get that at all from the director's work in this film. I love a lot of the performances, but I found the direction to be the true star of this film. It was shocked at how well the film was put together.

The shaky cam will be in the sequels. The only reason it shows up is avoid directly showing the violence to get the PG-13 rating. I think it was pretty obvious considering it was the only time the the extremely up close shaky-cam happens

Just like Twilight and Potter, I don't see why anyone is surprised by this. These franchises are bigger than their directors. Moreover the first installment almost always as the weakest direction.

Personally, I didn't see what Ross brought the the material didn't provide. The acting/actors are the real stars if anything. I hope the next director isn't a fan of the made for tv looking capital city.

That is usually because the first director isn't very good. That wasn't the case here.

You can do gritty without sacrificing the audience's ability to tell up from down.

Not if you want a PG-13 rating. Seriously, it had to be a studio choice to avoid an R rating.