The Hunger Games

[JP]

It was unnecessary for Potter. Unnecessary for Twilight, and the same goes for this.

 

[flash13]

It's unnecessary for The Hobbit as well

 

[JP]

Oh yeah, that too!

 

[MadVillainy]

I never read the Hobbit so I cant say.
HP as I said it couldve worked, maybe but they divided it at the end of the book.
Really there are only 2 (big) things that happen after where they split the first movie.
As for Breaking Dawn: From reading the synopsis and hear from people I know who are fans of the book it's VERY stupid to divide it because nothing happens in the book (even Twilight fans admit this).

But Im wondering where they would split it. I would get it if they were going to film Catching Fire and Mockingjay at the same time but to split one of them is beyond silly.

 

[JP]

My problem with the Potter split is that absolutely nothing happened in the last movie, whereas the trailer makes it appear that EVERYTHING happens in the last one.

 

[flash13]

The only way I could see them splitting Mockingjay would be to end the first movie after they rescue Peeta. The movies would be really short though.

 

[Crockett]

They're really confident aren't they? I got only the third book left but if it's a book they should split it definitely the last one then.

 

[Project862006]

Peeta and Effie on Set
http://www.popsugar.com/Josh-Hutcherson-Peeta-Hunger-Games-Pictures-17523044?page=0,0,2#3

 

[jmc]

Splitting films into 2 parts is nothing but a money grab, one day it will bite some studio in the arse.

 

[Crockett]

I agree since the books have equally lengths. It has a big fanbase but still, they should wait to see how the first one will perform before making huge plans for the other movies.

 

[jmc]

It ruins the films too as far as I'm concerned. The reason Potter did it is because the last book was so freakin' huge, but that's still a lame excuse for doing it, you're adapting the book, not re-telling it word for word.

 

[MadVillainy]

And they really couldve made HP7 3 hrs and gotten everything. As I said really only 2 events happen in Pt 2 unless they added a bunch of stuff

 

[jmc]

Hell they probably could have pushed Potter 7 to over 3 hours.

 

[ComicChick]

if any of the books of the trilogy could be two parts, it'd be Catching Fire (the second)

but i don't really see the need for 4 films.

and they better be longer than 90 minutes!!!!

 

[Jennifer Walters]

Reading the beginning part of Catching Fire, I can really see them having the ending of the first movie being Katniss and President Snow's first meeting.

 

[Crockett]

New set photos.
http://www.fangirltastic.com/content/set-photos-hunger-games

They're definitely shooting the reaping ceremony scene.

 

[zanos]

So I finally finished reading the book, interesting read and should make for a decent flick if handled right, ending wasn't great though so I hope they change that.

I don't see how they can change the ending without completely altering the plot of the books.

If..

Spoiler

They leave Rue's death untouched. It could a really really really great cinematic moment.

If I'm not mistaken this is going to be PG-13.

Whatever the 'true' ending is meant to be is irrelevant, this one was flat out ordinary and a bit of a cop out to be honest.

How so?

 

[John Locke]

If I'm not mistaken this is going to be PG-13.

I don't see how that's a problem.

Spoiler

Boromir's death in LOTR was shown in full. Cedric, Sirus, Dobby, and Dumbledoore (actual death not funeral and that was because of time) was shown in HP. Even Harry in Spiderman 3 had a similar death and it was shown. Why can't they do this one in full.

 

[Hush]

The two movie idea pisses me off so much, I mean seriously why the **** would they feel the need to do this? Its just ******ed. There is literally no reason in the world for the third book to be split, I don't have the slightes clue where the **** you would do this either, its a cash grab that really won't get you any extra cash.

 

[dark_b]

if the movies get popular then they make almost two times the money with the public. it will work with HP and Twilight. of course its stupid from the studio to admit this now. because it makes it obvious to everyone that they only think about money. which is IMO a bad way to start promotion.

 

[zanos]

I don't see how that's a problem.

Spoiler

Boromir's death in LOTR was shown in full. Cedric, Sirus, Dobby, and Dumbledoore (actual death not funeral and that was because of time) was shown in HP. Even Harry in Spiderman 3 had a similar death and it was shown. Why can't they do this one in full.

None of those characters was a little girl who

Spoiler

got speared in the stomach

lol!!!!!!

 

[Hush]

Yes but the level of violence is still about the same. It may be a tad dumbed down but if it fits thematically the MPAA will allow it or Lionsgate will just cut it for the directors cut or pay off the MPAA.

 

[John Locke]

None of those characters was a little girl who

Spoiler

got speared in the stomach

lol!!!!!!

Well yeah but

Spoiler

Boromir got three arrows in the stomach and Dobby got a knife to the stomach. Harry got hit in the stomach with a glider. Sure they're not little girls but same act basically. Also I have heard rumors of Lawerence recording Rue's Lullaby

 

[zanos]

As with most film adaptations of this nature I suspect this one will be a great big turd. Even the Potter films, which alot of ppl seem to love, are not particularly good, and those are actually well adaptated for the most part. The Hunger Games would have worked alot better as a HBO/Showtime television series. That way they could do something like 5-7 episodes for each book. I don't know how they're going to be able to tell a proper story in 90 minutes. That's like watching 2 episodes of Game of Thrones.

 

[Crockett]

I'm not worried, the books aren't long and Collins herself and Ross is writing the script, so they will find the best way to tell the story on screen. Since it's a young-adult series it wouldn't be up in either HBO's or Showtime's alley.