Hunger games

Rot your brains, then rot our boards

Moderators: SecondTalon, Moderators General, Prelates

User avatar
apricity
almost grown-up but not quite
Posts: 3983
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 9:28 am UTC

Re: Hunger games

Postby apricity » Tue Apr 03, 2012 1:53 am UTC

Yakk wrote:Meta-spoilers:
Spoiler:
The books, to me, read as an excuse to turn a stereotypical 14-year old romantic thought patterns and make them important to the world.

Sort of like The Last Starfighter is an excuse to turn a 14-year-old video game obsession into something important to the world.

Possibly that didn't show through in the movie.
Spoiler:
I agree with you that that didn't show through. I think the book does a better job of skirting the line between traditional young adult fiction (which is mostly about teenage girls and sometimes about teenage boys), and the dystopian genre. The movie seemed to do a worse job at... both of those simultaneously. The romance parts came across as silly and childish, and the dystopian parts were told more from a pretty adult perspective.

I am also a HUGE fan of YA and a lot of the complaints I'm seeing about the movie (not necessarily here, but definitely in other places) seem to be coming from people who don't really get the genre. It's supposed to be choppy and irrational in places, and none of the kids are supposed to have their shit figured out, because that's what teens are like. Katniss has had to grow up faster than most, but she's still a teenager, and others are even younger. The movie makes them seem more grown up than they're really supposed to, but some stuff, like the "romantic" scenes and Katniss not really realizing how revolutionary the thing with the berries is.
LE4d wrote:have you considered becoming an electron

it takes just a little practice to learn to be
(she/her/hers)

User avatar
Weeks
Hey Baby, wanna make a fortnight?
Posts: 2023
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 12:41 am UTC
Location: Ciudad de Panamá, Panamá

Re: Hunger games

Postby Weeks » Tue Apr 03, 2012 4:06 am UTC

YA as in young adult?
TaintedDeity wrote:Tainted Deity
suffer-cait wrote:One day I'm gun a go visit weeks and discover they're just a computer in a trashcan at an ice cream shop.
Dthen wrote:FUCK CHRISTMAS FUCK EVERYTHING FUCK YOU TOO FUCK OFF

User avatar
apricity
almost grown-up but not quite
Posts: 3983
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 9:28 am UTC

Re: Hunger games

Postby apricity » Tue Apr 03, 2012 11:23 pm UTC

Ya.
LE4d wrote:have you considered becoming an electron

it takes just a little practice to learn to be
(she/her/hers)

User avatar
mochafairy
Posts: 1098
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:27 pm UTC
Location: Ohio

Re: Hunger games

Postby mochafairy » Fri Apr 06, 2012 9:58 pm UTC

For those who have read the book and seen the movie, how would you compare the triggery-ness of the movie to the book?
"YES. DO IT WITH CONFIDENCE" ~fortune cookie

User avatar
Zarq
Posts: 1993
Joined: Mon Jul 26, 2010 7:29 pm UTC
Location: Third Rock from Earth's Yellow Sun

Re: Hunger games

Postby Zarq » Fri Apr 06, 2012 10:50 pm UTC

Which type of triggers?
You rang?

"It is better to shit yourself, than to die of constipation." - Some picture on reddit

User avatar
mochafairy
Posts: 1098
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:27 pm UTC
Location: Ohio

Re: Hunger games

Postby mochafairy » Sat Apr 07, 2012 5:09 am UTC

The violence, the gore, the general depravity and depressing nature...I think those were the main concerns from the first book.
"YES. DO IT WITH CONFIDENCE" ~fortune cookie

User avatar
apricity
almost grown-up but not quite
Posts: 3983
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 9:28 am UTC

Re: Hunger games

Postby apricity » Sat Apr 07, 2012 6:10 pm UTC

Ah, sorry, I meant to tell you about it! It is much less of all of those things than the book. The one violent image that stands out to me was
Spoiler:
Cato is shown snapping the neck of the kid that rigged the bombs around the food.
The rest of the violence is generally shown through very shaky camera work to make it seem like there's a struggle but without actually showing anything too bad. Can anyone else think of anything that stands out?
LE4d wrote:have you considered becoming an electron

it takes just a little practice to learn to be
(she/her/hers)

User avatar
Angua
Don't call her Delphine.
Posts: 5941
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 12:42 pm UTC
Location: UK/[St. Kitts and] Nevis Occasionally, I migrate to the US for a bit

Re: Hunger games

Postby Angua » Sat Apr 07, 2012 6:47 pm UTC

The bit with the hornets
Spoiler:
They show the girl with her face all swollen up.
Crabtree's bludgeon: “no set of mutually inconsistent observations can exist for which some human intellect cannot conceive a coherent explanation, however complicated”
GNU Terry Pratchett

User avatar
Obby
Posts: 785
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2008 11:37 pm UTC
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Hunger games

Postby Obby » Sun Apr 08, 2012 3:34 am UTC

There's also

Spoiler:
some blood from when Rue gets impaled by the spear. Not tons, but it's definitely noticeable.
The story so far:
In the beginning the Universe was created.
This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.

PossibleSloth
Posts: 88
Joined: Mon May 11, 2009 6:51 am UTC
Location: Boston (or thereabouts)

Re: Hunger games

Postby PossibleSloth » Mon Apr 09, 2012 6:51 am UTC

LaserGuy wrote:I also would have liked to have seen some discussion of the fairness in having 12 year olds fighting 18 year olds (especially considering that one of the groups was, IIRC, gaming the system by always sending 18 year olds who were specifically trained to win this particular tournament). Not necessarily that the organizers would have recognized or cared about the inherent unfairness of such a circumstance, but surely the tributes would have.


I haven't seen the movie, but in the book they mention that the lottery system is set up so older children have a higher probability of being selected. The Capitol wanted 12 year olds and their parents worrying whether they would be chosen, but still wanted the games to consist of mostly older kids. Remember that the whole thing was originally designed as a punishment and the entertainment/reality TV aspects might evolved over the years.

Chen
Posts: 5579
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Hunger games

Postby Chen » Tue Apr 10, 2012 4:24 pm UTC

PossibleSloth wrote:I haven't seen the movie, but in the book they mention that the lottery system is set up so older children have a higher probability of being selected. The Capitol wanted 12 year olds and their parents worrying whether they would be chosen, but still wanted the games to consist of mostly older kids. Remember that the whole thing was originally designed as a punishment and the entertainment/reality TV aspects might evolved over the years.


Its hinted at in the movie when Katniss tells Prim that her name is "only in once" and then talks to Gale about his being in a whole bunch of times. I think you enter your name once each year between 12 and 18 AND you can get an extra person's worth of rations (oil, grain or such) for each extra time you enter your name.

User avatar
mochafairy
Posts: 1098
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:27 pm UTC
Location: Ohio

Re: Hunger games

Postby mochafairy » Tue Apr 10, 2012 7:34 pm UTC

lanicita wrote:Ah, sorry, I meant to tell you about it! It is much less of all of those things than the book. The one violent image that stands out to me was
Spoiler:
Cato is shown snapping the neck of the kid that rigged the bombs around the food.
The rest of the violence is generally shown through very shaky camera work to make it seem like there's a struggle but without actually showing anything too bad. Can anyone else think of anything that stands out?


It's okay! No worries.

My SO and I went and saw it. My brain is way more graphic. Stupid brain.

Anyway, I'm curious how they're going to deal with things that the left out/changed, such as
Spoiler:
the significance of the pin and where it came from, and Peeta's leg
"YES. DO IT WITH CONFIDENCE" ~fortune cookie

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26820
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Hunger games

Postby gmalivuk » Tue Apr 10, 2012 8:06 pm UTC

On the pin:
Spoiler:
The old woman she bought it from in the black market seemed sentimentally attached, so I could see the same basic backstory still working, and just having it be that old woman's sister or daughter instead of the mayor's dead sister-in-law.


And the other:
Spoiler:
What about Peeta's leg? I don't remember anything important about that being different from the book.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
LaserGuy
Posts: 4585
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

Re: Hunger games

Postby LaserGuy » Tue Apr 10, 2012 8:13 pm UTC

gmalivuk wrote:And the other:
Spoiler:
What about Peeta's leg? I don't remember anything important about that being different from the book.


Book spoiler
Spoiler:
In the book, Peeta loses his leg due to Katniss using a tourniquet on him and has a prosthetic one; in the movie, this is not mentioned at all. I don't know what the significance of this is going forward, as I haven't read further.

User avatar
mochafairy
Posts: 1098
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:27 pm UTC
Location: Ohio

Re: Hunger games

Postby mochafairy » Tue Apr 10, 2012 8:20 pm UTC

Re: the other
Spoiler:
he lost his leg at the end of the first book, and it kinda seemed like his leg was fine after he got the meds in the movie. He had to have it in a turnequet at the end because of stuff happening at the cornucopia with the mutts and Cato, but they left that out. In the 75th hunger games, it makes it so Peeta can't walk as well or fast as the others, well, that and he has other issues, but that's besides the point.
"YES. DO IT WITH CONFIDENCE" ~fortune cookie

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26820
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Hunger games

Postby gmalivuk » Tue Apr 10, 2012 8:32 pm UTC

Oh right.

Spoiler:
I don't think his losing the leg is actually all that important, since his walking slower could be explained simply as a result of the older injury.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Yakk
Poster with most posts but no title.
Posts: 11129
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 7:27 pm UTC
Location: E pur si muove

Re: Hunger games

Postby Yakk » Tue Apr 10, 2012 8:39 pm UTC

Book 1 difference from movie, impact on Book 2
Spoiler:
And, artificial legs are more annoying to do on screen than in a book. :)
One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision - BR

Last edited by JHVH on Fri Oct 23, 4004 BCE 6:17 pm, edited 6 times in total.

quantumcat42
Posts: 221
Joined: Mon Jun 28, 2010 6:06 pm UTC

Re: Hunger games

Postby quantumcat42 » Tue Apr 10, 2012 8:51 pm UTC

mochafairy wrote:Anyway, I'm curious how they're going to deal with things that the left out/changed, such as
Spoiler:
the significance of the pin and where it came from, and Peeta's leg


Pin:
Spoiler:
I think hooking it to Prim rather than the mayor's daughter was a good choice for the movie. It re-enforced the sisters' bond, and the full significance of the pin's origin is not explained in the first book. There's still some leeway to expand on the pin's backstory in later movies, as Katniss could find out whose it was before the trinket-lady got it; but if you just go in for the movie it doesn't feel like you're missing any of its significance.

User avatar
WarDaft
Posts: 1583
Joined: Thu Jul 30, 2009 3:16 pm UTC

Re: Hunger games

Postby WarDaft » Wed Apr 11, 2012 2:44 pm UTC

I saw the movie, having intentionally avoided just about everything I could, because the trailer looked like something I could really like and I hate spoilers. I also couldn't just read the book, because I'm part way through ASoIaF and I'm not switching tracks there.


I didn't really find it confusing. A lot of stuff was subtle, but I like subtle. It also means you can get more out of watching it later if you missed it the first time. But then I didn't think Primer was confusing either, so maybe I'm not a good sample point.

Spoiler:
Even smart people* are asking stuff like "Isn't it really stupid to encourage young people to learn to fight?"
In a world where the riot police are wearing bullet proof vests, and the people in charge have FLIPPING HOVER CRAFTS, I really don't think knife fighting is the most relevant or empowering skill to develop. Encouraging young people to spend their lives (in this case, expend) in the pursuit of a miniscule chanceat fame and fortune, that will destroy them and shorten their life span even if they succeed. Already pretty much a thing.
It's spelled out really blatantly in the movie even.


Hovercrafts, high powered energy weapons (you may perhaps have called them giant fireballs), weapons and armor not made of wood, the ability to engineer (in a matter of days or hours) and remotely fabricate (in a matter of seconds) entirely new, extremely vicious creatures...

Yeah, if this series ends with the poor districts actually overthrowing the capitol through anything but extremely clever non-combat strategies (and don't tell me either way) the it'll be one of the worst portrayals of hyperadvanced military technology since Star Wars VI.
All Shadow priest spells that deal Fire damage now appear green.
Big freaky cereal boxes of death.

User avatar
hawkinsssable
Promoted
Posts: 216
Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 7:46 am UTC

Re: Hunger games

Postby hawkinsssable » Fri Apr 13, 2012 2:53 pm UTC

Weeks wrote:I didn't like
Spoiler:
Rue's death scene. I dunno if it was the child's acting, but something felt off with it. I couldn't get immersed in it. And it was obvious that this was seeking a reaction from the audience (since up to that point everything was tailored for us to feel sympathy for Rue), so I kind of saw it coming. Katniss's reactions were pretty good but I still had trouble relating.


I felt the exact same thing. I reckon it was because...
Spoiler:
Katniss' reaction was completely inappropriate and, well, out of character. Up until then - and even after then - she had this intense survival instinct that came through in a whole bunch of little ways (like when she runs into redhead near the beginning, and you can just tell that she's this little bit more aggressive and ready to fight, even though she'd rather run.) And when Rue dies, it evaporates. She doesn't drag Rue under cover. She holds her long after she dies. She spends the time to pick a bouqet of flowers, walking slowly in the middle of the sunlight, and there's never anything to suggest that she's even slightly on edge, being slightly careful, or even just continuing to listen closely for any other tributes. Instead, the movie was beating over our heads just how sad this one particular death was (so much moreso than any of the others) and it felt completely artificial.


I quite liked the movie, but not enough to read the books. They captured that sense of dread in the first half really well, and it was perfectly paced most of the way through. It was rarely too heavy-handed, which I liked. I wish they hadn't spent SO MUCH time trying to make Katniss out as this perfect ethical person, though. I don't see why they found it so necessary to make sure she
Spoiler:
never directly participated in killing except when trying to protect the cute little black girl.
Reason has always existed, but not always in a reasonable form.

Sheikh al-Majaneen
Name Checks Out On Time, Tips Chambermaid
Posts: 1075
Joined: Fri Jan 01, 2010 5:17 am UTC

Re: Hunger games

Postby Sheikh al-Majaneen » Fri Apr 13, 2012 5:06 pm UTC

Angua wrote:The Capital was trying to pretend it was semi-civilised and fair. I don't see how they can do that with 12 year olds fighting 18 year olds.

I don't remember them pretending that the purpose of the hunger games was anything other than a symbol of the complete and utter domination of the capital over the districts.

Edit: I haven't seen the movie.

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Hunger games

Postby Izawwlgood » Fri Apr 13, 2012 6:00 pm UTC

Spoiler:
hawkinsssable wrote: And when Rue dies, it evaporates.

I don't think it takes a large leap to see
Spoiler:
how Rue = Prim in Katniss' mind, and seeing Rue die was harder on Katniss than, say, seeing anyone else die.


hawkinsssable wrote:I wish they hadn't spent SO MUCH time trying to make Katniss out as this perfect ethical person, though

Perhaps because something pertaining to her ethics is going to play into the later books? Or because the point of the story is to show 'barbaric and awful conflict from the eyes of an innocent', and one way to portray innocence in gladiatorial combat is to have her avoid fighting as much as possible?
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
apricity
almost grown-up but not quite
Posts: 3983
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 9:28 am UTC

Re: Hunger games

Postby apricity » Fri Apr 13, 2012 11:37 pm UTC

hawkinsssable wrote:I don't see why they found it so necessary to make sure she
Spoiler:
never directly participated in killing except when trying to protect the cute little black girl.
Spoiler:
Just out of curiosity, why did you mention Rue's skin color in this sentence? But anyway, she does that in the book too. Then she feels bothered by it and doesn't really understand why, until she remembers she actually killed a person. The movie made her out to be much more good-guy than the book does.
LE4d wrote:have you considered becoming an electron

it takes just a little practice to learn to be
(she/her/hers)

User avatar
Adacore
Posts: 2755
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:35 pm UTC
Location: 한국 창원

Re: Hunger games

Postby Adacore » Sat Apr 14, 2012 12:58 pm UTC

lanicita wrote:
hawkinsssable wrote:I don't see why they found it so necessary to make sure she
Spoiler:
never directly participated in killing except when trying to protect the cute little black girl.
Spoiler:
Just out of curiosity, why did you mention Rue's skin color in this sentence? But anyway, she does that in the book too. Then she feels bothered by it and doesn't really understand why, until she remembers she actually killed a person. The movie made her out to be much more good-guy than the book does.

Normally the first identifiers humans use for anything (people, objects, whatever) are colour and size...

User avatar
UniqueScreenname
Something something Purple. Stop asking.
Posts: 1430
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 8:11 pm UTC
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: Hunger games

Postby UniqueScreenname » Sat Apr 14, 2012 1:42 pm UTC

I watched the movie without reading the books and since have read the first two. I thought the movie was good and still do now that I've read the books. Someone mentioned
Spoiler:
the movie not making it clear that Katniss wasn't really in love with Peeta.
I got that impression. I remember feeling confused and unaware what was real, and I really appreciate that now, because I know in the books that that's how Katniss feels.
The one complaint I have is that
Spoiler:
I feel like in the movie, they made it seem like Katniss is a lot more aware of what she's doing, what she's seeing, whereas the book makes it seem like she takes her time figuring out what is a threat, what is dangerous, what is reliable. She's much more cautious.
It's a minor change, but I feel like it makes Katniss a bit more human, more 16.

Hearing the complaints about Rue being black is sad for me. Like that one article, I find myself imagining most of the characters in the book as being black. I suppose that's the easiest way I find to illustrate the obvious class distinction.

As far as Rue's death scene being out of character, I think too many people are imagining the participants in the game as calloused killers. Not only are they people being forced to kill other people, but they are children ending the lives of other children who have been robbed of a future. Without the connection to Prim, I feel like the emotion she displayed there was exactly right, losing not only (at that point) her one ally, but a young, goodhearted girl.

And regarding the 12-18 thing, NOTHING ABOUT THE GAMES IS SUPPOSED TO BE FAIR. The viewers in the Capitol don't care at all about the ages and whether it's fair or not because all they care about is the bloodbath. Age is irrelevant because no matter what the age, they can still die. The more unfair the Games are, the more entertainment the Capitol gets and the more pain the districts feel, reminding them of how powerless they are.
PolakoVoador wrote:Pizza is never a question, pizza is always the answer.
poxic wrote:When we're stuck, flailing, and afraid, that's usually when we're running into the limitations of our old ways of doing things. Something new is being born. Stick around and find out what it is.

User avatar
natraj
Posts: 1895
Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 10:13 pm UTC
Location: away from Omelas

Re: Hunger games

Postby natraj » Sat Apr 14, 2012 3:08 pm UTC

Adacore wrote:Normally the first identifiers humans use for anything (people, objects, whatever) are colour and size...


I don't think that is very often true with regards to people; at least, when talking to people who come from countries with white majorities, it is pretty uncommon to hear a white person described by their race first, but quite common to hear people of colour described by their race first. Which just contributes to the idea of white-as-default, and everything else as the Not Normal that needs attention drawn to it.

(In my experience it is also pretty uncommon at all in ordinary conversation and not, say, a descriptive paragraph in a novel, to hear people describe people by their actual colour rather than their race as an identifier, so I think it is slightly disingenuous to act as if this is just an extension of How We Describe Objects. Do you really find people all that often saying "The little dark-brownish girl" or "that kind of light-tan boy" or "that woman who is sort of middling-fair with pinkish undertones", as opposed to saying they are black, or latino, or asian, or white, etc.?)
You want to know the future, love? Then wait:
I'll answer your impatient questions. Still --
They'll call it chance, or luck, or call it Fate,
The cards and stars that tumble as they will.

pronouns: they or he

User avatar
hawkinsssable
Promoted
Posts: 216
Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 7:46 am UTC

Re: Hunger games

Postby hawkinsssable » Sun Apr 15, 2012 1:17 am UTC

Izawwlgood wrote:
Spoiler:
how Rue = Prim in Katniss' mind, and seeing Rue die was harder on Katniss than, say, seeing anyone else die.

Spoiler:
I understood that, but I still would have liked to see just a little bit of survival instinct beneath the grief (especially when she was wandering around collecting flowers and gently placing them on Rue's chest.) It all seemed just a bit too detached from the necessary messiness and ugliness of the hunger games. I might just be fishing for a reason the scene seemed to ring hollow for me, though, and it might be for a different reason.


Izawwlgood wrote:
Spoiler:
hawkinsssable wrote:I wish they hadn't spent SO MUCH time trying to make Katniss out as this perfect ethical person, though

Perhaps because something pertaining to her ethics is going to play into the later books? Or because the point of the story is to show 'barbaric and awful conflict from the eyes of an innocent', and one way to portray innocence in gladiatorial combat is to have her avoid fighting as much as possible?


Spoiler:
re: Katniss & Ethics: That does make sense, but I think the conflict being 'barbaric and awful' would come across strongly enough even if Katniss participated just a little bit more. But my bigger problem was that she killed more than enough people - she directly caused the death by bees / wolf-monsters - but only in indirect ways. Personally, I don't see that much difference between, say, shooting a bad guy in the hand and causing him to fall vs. shooting him in the head in the first place.


lanicita wrote:
Spoiler:
Just out of curiosity, why did you mention Rue's skin color in this sentence? But anyway, she does that in the book too. Then she feels bothered by it and doesn't really understand why, until she remembers she actually killed a person. The movie made her out to be much more good-guy than the book does.


Spoiler:
I mentioned the skin colour because I assumed she was cast as a "cute little black girl" instead of "cute little girl" to make super duper clear that she was especially vulnerable and innocent. It also helps that she was the only (I think?) black girl and one of barely any black tributes. But I'm probably reading too much into it and didn't need to mention it.
Reason has always existed, but not always in a reasonable form.

User avatar
apricity
almost grown-up but not quite
Posts: 3983
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 9:28 am UTC

Re: Hunger games

Postby apricity » Sun Apr 15, 2012 2:05 am UTC

hawkinsssable wrote:
lanicita wrote:
Spoiler:
Just out of curiosity, why did you mention Rue's skin color in this sentence? But anyway, she does that in the book too. Then she feels bothered by it and doesn't really understand why, until she remembers she actually killed a person. The movie made her out to be much more good-guy than the book does.
Spoiler:
I mentioned the skin colour because I assumed she was cast as a "cute little black girl" instead of "cute little girl" to make super duper clear that she was especially vulnerable and innocent. It also helps that she was the only (I think?) black girl and one of barely any black tributes. But I'm probably reading too much into it and didn't need to mention it.
Spoiler:
I see. It's interesting that you perceived it that way. In the books, it seems the author wanted to be clear that the society is racist, and did that by emphasizing that the people in District 11, who tend to have darker skin than the people in the other districts, are treated worse than other districts. I assume she had Rue come from that district because it would be easy for Katniss to find out from her what District 11 was like. Rue as a character served many purposes: sweet kid that reminded Katniss of Prim and became her ally; small child who everybody was unhappy had been chosen as tribute because it seemed so unfair; teacher to Katniss and the viewers/readers of what District 11 is like, to introduce the racism aspect of the books (the fact that District 11 has to do all the agricultural work on as little food as District 12, and it is much more strict so they could never get away with hunting like Katniss does because their fence is electrified and they'd be shot if they were caught). So in a way, being a cute little black girl does seem to include all the aspects of her character that are important.

I was just asking because it seemed unnecessary in the sentence you wrote, but now I get what you were saying. It's true, nobody tends to cast black actors in ambiguous roles, so being black was indeed a specific casting choice. It sucks that the world works that way. Although actually, Cinna's skin color is never mentioned in the books and they cast Lenny Kravitz, who is black. But then they cast Jennifer Lawrence as Katniss even though she was supposed to have "olive" skin.
LE4d wrote:have you considered becoming an electron

it takes just a little practice to learn to be
(she/her/hers)

User avatar
hawkinsssable
Promoted
Posts: 216
Joined: Fri May 06, 2011 7:46 am UTC

Re: Hunger games

Postby hawkinsssable » Sun Apr 15, 2012 3:15 am UTC

Slightly off-topicly, this thread just convinced me to read the books. It sounds like they explore a lot of things I thought were really interesting, but underdeveloped, in the film.

Also, agreed re: how annoying the default white guy casting choice is. Just like how all babies are white
Reason has always existed, but not always in a reasonable form.

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Hunger games

Postby Izawwlgood » Sun Apr 15, 2012 3:47 am UTC

Spoiler:
lanicita wrote:It's interesting that you perceived it that way. In the books, it seems the author wanted to be clear that the society is racist

Spoiler:
Really? I admit I didn't catch that/think of that. My impression was that 'some of the districts' were better off than others, but that race had nothing to do with that. The capital had people of all skin colors/ethnicities, and it just so happened that District 11, which was mostly darker skinned people, was a particularly poor district. That said, District 12 felt the 'poorest', and my impression was that they were vaguely Native American-esque, or Irish. I dunno; race was pretty much a non issue as I read it in the books, because characters racial profiles seems so random. Cinna had dark skin, but some other people in the capital I think had epicanthic folds. So, yeah?

Spoiler:
hawkinsssable wrote:I understood that, but I still would have liked to see just a little bit of survival instinct beneath the grief (especially when she was wandering around collecting flowers and gently placing them on Rue's chest.) It all seemed just a bit too detached from the necessary messiness and ugliness of the hunger games. I might just be fishing for a reason the scene seemed to ring hollow for me, though, and it might be for a different reason.

Spoiler:
If anything, the scene should have felt hollow insofar as we haven't yet really established much of a connection to Rue. But Katniss being out of her mind with grief to an extent you couldn't relate too seems an odd complaint.

Spoiler:
hawkinsssable wrote:but I think the conflict being 'barbaric and awful' would come across strongly enough even if Katniss participated just a little bit more. But my bigger problem was that she killed more than enough people - she directly caused the death by bees / wolf-monsters - but only in indirect ways. Personally, I don't see that much difference between, say, shooting a bad guy in the hand and causing him to fall vs. shooting him in the head in the first place.

Spoiler:
There isn't a difference; Collins wasn't trying to suggest Katniss didn't kill anyone, she was pointing out that a completely innocent and moral individual can, when placed into a horrible situation (like war), gradually become part of the horror. The Hunger Games Trilogy often felt like Katniss wasn't really the protagonist in the story, because the point was to show the horrors of war through the eyes of an innocent, particularly, how she gradually/kind of/sort of becomes less innocent.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
Adacore
Posts: 2755
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 12:35 pm UTC
Location: 한국 창원

Re: Hunger games

Postby Adacore » Sun Apr 15, 2012 1:12 pm UTC

natraj wrote:
Adacore wrote:Normally the first identifiers humans use for anything (people, objects, whatever) are colour and size...


I don't think that is very often true with regards to people; at least, when talking to people who come from countries with white majorities, it is pretty uncommon to hear a white person described by their race first, but quite common to hear people of colour described by their race first. Which just contributes to the idea of white-as-default, and everything else as the Not Normal that needs attention drawn to it.

(In my experience it is also pretty uncommon at all in ordinary conversation and not, say, a descriptive paragraph in a novel, to hear people describe people by their actual colour rather than their race as an identifier, so I think it is slightly disingenuous to act as if this is just an extension of How We Describe Objects. Do you really find people all that often saying "The little dark-brownish girl" or "that kind of light-tan boy" or "that woman who is sort of middling-fair with pinkish undertones", as opposed to saying they are black, or latino, or asian, or white, etc.?)

You're right, of course, that 'colour' is a slightly disingenous way to describe race, as they're not entirely synonymous. I would argue they serve broadly similar descriptive functions, though. As a white person living in Korea, I would always include a racial identifier when describing people of any race - the majority race here, obviously, is Korean, but the majority of my friends are westerners, so there's no 'default' race (either white or korean) in conversation. You are correct, however, that when I was in the UK, white-default would be assumed.

User avatar
Yakk
Poster with most posts but no title.
Posts: 11129
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 7:27 pm UTC
Location: E pur si muove

Re: Hunger games

Postby Yakk » Sun Apr 15, 2012 1:38 pm UTC

There are very few "black" (race) people who I would describe their colour as "black". I wouldn't call a car "black" if it was the colour of Rue's skin. I wouldn't call a pencil "black" if it left marks the colour of Rue's skin. Her hair in certain lights? Sure. But I'm not sure how calling Rue "black" means anything except describing her racially, as determined by usual American/European racial groupings (where someone whose ancestry is three-quarters Irish is unambiguously "black").
One of the painful things about our time is that those who feel certainty are stupid, and those with any imagination and understanding are filled with doubt and indecision - BR

Last edited by JHVH on Fri Oct 23, 4004 BCE 6:17 pm, edited 6 times in total.

User avatar
apricity
almost grown-up but not quite
Posts: 3983
Joined: Fri Jan 26, 2007 9:28 am UTC

Re: Hunger games

Postby apricity » Sun Apr 15, 2012 2:17 pm UTC

Izawwlgood wrote:
Spoiler:
lanicita wrote:It's interesting that you perceived it that way. In the books, it seems the author wanted to be clear that the society is racist

Spoiler:
Really? I admit I didn't catch that/think of that. My impression was that 'some of the districts' were better off than others, but that race had nothing to do with that. The capital had people of all skin colors/ethnicities, and it just so happened that District 11, which was mostly darker skinned people, was a particularly poor district. That said, District 12 felt the 'poorest', and my impression was that they were vaguely Native American-esque, or Irish. I dunno; race was pretty much a non issue as I read it in the books, because characters racial profiles seems so random. Cinna had dark skin, but some other people in the capital I think had epicanthic folds. So, yeah?
Spoiler:
Well, Cinna's skin color is never described in the books. They just say he has green eyes and brown hair. But the fact that the D11 contestants were both dark-skinned, and they were also in the most oppressed district, AND theirs was the agricultural district (ie. working on plantations) were supposed to be hints at racism. Also, there's the matter of the people in the Capitol dyeing their skin in different colors. That would be harder to do on darker skin because of the underlying pigment, so I suspect that was also a hint that the people in the Capitol generally have lighter skin. But I might be reaching.
LE4d wrote:have you considered becoming an electron

it takes just a little practice to learn to be
(she/her/hers)

Chen
Posts: 5579
Joined: Fri Jul 25, 2008 6:53 pm UTC
Location: Montreal

Re: Hunger games

Postby Chen » Mon Apr 16, 2012 12:04 pm UTC

lanicita wrote:
Spoiler:
Well, Cinna's skin color is never described in the books. They just say he has green eyes and brown hair. But the fact that the D11 contestants were both dark-skinned, and they were also in the most oppressed district, AND theirs was the agricultural district (ie. working on plantations) were supposed to be hints at racism. Also, there's the matter of the people in the Capitol dyeing their skin in different colors. That would be harder to do on darker skin because of the underlying pigment, so I suspect that was also a hint that the people in the Capitol generally have lighter skin. But I might be reaching.


Is Cinna never described as dark skinned in the books? I had thought he was, though maybe its not in the first one.

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Hunger games

Postby Izawwlgood » Mon Apr 16, 2012 6:05 pm UTC

Spoiler:
@lanicita: I could have sworn Cinna was described as dark, but could be wrong. Something about the gold eye liner subtly accentuating his darker skin? Anyway.
I think you're spot on with District 11 being black and oppressed. I just didn't connect the dots. I do think you're reaching that the capital was devoid of dark skinned individuals though; my impression was that the technology of the capital would have allowed skin dying regardless of how dark a body was. And, although I don't have anything to verify this, I am under the impression that the capital was a racial melting pot. The idea being that while the districts are now separate, the capital is made up of the forefathers of those who lived in each district years ago.

Maybe I'm reaching here, but my thought process for the creation of Panem was as follows; after America, a bunch of separate city states come together to form the Capital. The Capital begins to rule over the 13 Districts, and then rebellion breaks out. The Capital squashes said rebellion.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26820
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Hunger games

Postby gmalivuk » Mon Apr 16, 2012 6:36 pm UTC

Cinna's eyeliner is said to accentuate the flecks of color in his eyes, and his hair is described as brown, but there seems to be nothing about his skin, at least when he's first introduced.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Hunger games

Postby Izawwlgood » Mon Apr 16, 2012 6:36 pm UTC

Ah, I must have remembered wrong.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26820
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

Re: Hunger games

Postby gmalivuk » Mon Apr 16, 2012 6:39 pm UTC

I had no real memory of it either way, but one of the awesome things about the Kindle is being able to search a book quickly for every mention of a particular person.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)

User avatar
Izawwlgood
WINNING
Posts: 18686
Joined: Mon Nov 19, 2007 3:55 pm UTC
Location: There may be lovelier lovelies...

Re: Hunger games

Postby Izawwlgood » Mon Apr 16, 2012 7:00 pm UTC

Search: "Katniss" and "uncertain[include synonyms]" : within 4 words of one another.
Hits: All of the words.
... with gigantic melancholies and gigantic mirth, to tread the jeweled thrones of the Earth under his sandalled feet.

User avatar
UniqueScreenname
Something something Purple. Stop asking.
Posts: 1430
Joined: Mon Oct 24, 2011 8:11 pm UTC
Location: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe

Re: Hunger games

Postby UniqueScreenname » Wed Apr 18, 2012 3:07 am UTC

I thought Cinna was described as "olive", same as Katniss.
PolakoVoador wrote:Pizza is never a question, pizza is always the answer.
poxic wrote:When we're stuck, flailing, and afraid, that's usually when we're running into the limitations of our old ways of doing things. Something new is being born. Stick around and find out what it is.


Return to “Movies and TV Shows”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests