THE HUNGER GAMES - the movie

The Hunger Games probably wouldn't have been a must-see movie for me, but it certainly was for my kids, who both liked the first book a lot. I liked the book, too, but not enough to read on in the series immediately.

But after seeing the film, I did want to read on, and I did. Partly that was because of the vision of the filmmakers, who showed a dark, unwelcoming future where people live almost like pioneers, even as the ruling classes in the Capitol live in luxury. I wanted to find out more about this future; how did it come about and how did it work? The second and third books give more insight into these ideas; presumably the films will also.

Some things work better, in my opinion, on film, and I think it's very possible that The Hunger Games is one of those things. I'm a verbal, not so much a visual, person. So when I see a richly rendered vision I'm impressed. Personally, I thought that The Hunger Games did just that. Some may disagree.

I thought there were pretty decent performances. Yes, some of the tributes seemed to be caricatures of violent youths, but then again, that's sort of what they are. They are stunted in their growth purposely for these Games, and the performances more or less matched what I was thinking about those trubutes. But the main characters, Katniss, Peeta, and Haymitch, all were very good portrayals with some depth.

I'm not a film reviewer; I tend to like a lot of stuff I see and I am not overly critical of things I don't know much about. What I saw here was a big budget movie that succeeded in conveying the vision and in telling the first part of a broader story. I'm not saying that this is a great film, destined to be a classic, but I think it's a solid entry into the subcategory of dystopian fictional films.

*****

The Hunger Games - film and books

I recently watched The Hunger Games on the big screen. It inspired me to read the final two books in the series, which I did over the course of the last three days. They ended up being pretty decent, quick reads.

I liked the first book of the trilogy, but not enough to rush into reading its follow-up book, Catching Fire. I've seen and heard criticism of the series regarding the fact that kids are fighting and killing other kids in the series, and that is an issue, but then again, that's sort of the point of the story. They were written for young adults, so it sorta follows that they'd be about young adults doing things.

I see the point though. It's sort of disconcerting to watch children fight, as it was in the movie. It's sort of disconcerting, though less so, to read about it, at least for me, because of the context that the reader gets that the moviegoer might miss. In the end, though, after all three books (I finished Mockingjay today, a few hours ago), I found them to be pretty decent dystopian fiction.

I want to digest the material a bit more before commenting further, but I'm going to try to say more about these works. Maybe I'll separate them into movie and books. I'll also be interested to see what they do with the next book in the series, which doesn't seem as film-ready.

*****

The Disney Channel

While laid up, I got to spend more time around the family than I usually did. In the winter months, I usually don't get home till relatively late, and by the time I'm home the kids are getting ready for bed, or at least immersed in homework that I need to go over with them.

This additional time translated in part to watching some TV shows with my middle school kids that I usually wouldn't see. A fair number of them were Disney Channel shows.

The shows that they like a lot are Wizards of Waverly Place, Shake It Up, Jesse, Austin and Ally, and of course, Phineas and Ferb. Three months ago, I doubt that you could have forced me to watch these programs. But they have their charm, as I realized from sort-of-forced viewing. They have their innocent humor, their cute girls, their cool guys, and stories that are simple but at least effective enough to occupy my middlee schoolers' minds. They have another show or two that they like quite a bit, but not on Disney. (They're big fans of Big Time Rush.)

These aren't just shows for girls. Austin and Ally, for example, has my kids interested in internet programming and its possibilities, not to mention songwriting and playing music. (They already have a pretty strong basis for this interest.) Wizards of Waverly Place (which has apparently ended as a series but is still being shown in reruns) entertained them with its Harry Potter wannabe vibe. They just find the other shows entertaining.

I'm glad to report that maybe Disney is doing something basically right with their programming on the Disney Channel.

*****

John Carter...really?

It's been awhile since I've posted anything substantial hereabouts. I've been injured, as you may note from my previous post over a month ago, and my time has been very limited. My limited work schedule has been quite packed since I have a significant backlog of work to do, and lots of paperwork needs to be done this time of the year, regardless of the disability and medical insurance stuff I have to also pay attention to.

Anyway, as I was coming into work this morning, I heard on the news that John Carter was expected (by analysts) to lose 150 million dollars. It did 30 million (if I heard right) last weekend. And it cost 250 million to make.

Wow.

Who is John Carter, anyway? I mean, here I am, a SF fan, and I have never read the Edgar Rice Burroughs book. I loved Asimov, Heinlein, Clarke, and dabbled in others also. I read a lot of Brin, Benford, Card, Bear, among others. But I've never read A Princess of Mars. So maybe I'm making an assumption here, but is this story set on Mars? If it is, well, our well-known scientific knowledge (even my middle school kids know this) points out that Mars doesn't have any life on it.

However, I have to admit that I don't know what exactly the premise of this story is. Maybe they've retold it to make some sort of sense. I don't know.

So here are these big ol' commercials for the film, and they look pretty nice, but they aren't compelling. I asked my kids: Does that movie look cool? And I got a lukewarm "Yeah, it looks pretty cool." Not an "I gotta see it, it's so cool-looking" answer. You'd have to hear it to know the difference. There was no follow-up for them, asking about it. Once my younger son asked, "Who's John Carter?" (My answer was that he was a classic character from an early science fiction novel...but I've never read it.)

I feel the same way about the previews and commercials for the films. I got way more excited about the previews for Enchanted when it was coming out a few years back. Or for Bedtime Stories. These commercials don't excite me at all.

It's hard to believe that they spent that kind of money without knowing what their audience was. Is 30M a good opening weekend for a "blockbuster"? It doesn't sound too good. But maybe I'm wrong on that.

Maybe this movie is one of those things that sounds like a great idea but can't really live up to it, even if done extraordinarily well. Time will tell, I suppose.

addendum: Honor Hunter over at Blue Sky Disney posts THIS about the film, suggesting that it's a pretty good movie after all. Maybe even a great movie. I didn't realize that Andrew Stanton directed it. He points to huge marketing flaws as the reason for its suck-y opening. And that's more or less my point here. The marketing for this film stinks. My kids agree with what Honor says. They want to see The Hunger Games, not John Carter.

addendum #2: Cory Gross gives this film a pretty darned good review HERE at Voyages Extraordinaire also. I always considered myself a science fiction fan, but it seems I've missed something by missing this series. OTOH, it doesn't sound like the cerebral SF of Asimov or Clarke, which was more what I went for. I did recognize some of the names as I read the review from a book by Heinlein, especially Dejah Thoris...(Was that book The Number Of The Beast?)

*****

A January without posts is like...

...well, like any other month, I guess. But I couldn't let it get past me.

I had a bit of a setback late last month. I fell. Broke my ankle in multiple spots. Now I have lots of metal in there. My buddy says that now I get to look forward to the body cavity searches when I fly. I hope not.

Anyway, I just wanted to say, before the month ends, that DFR has not gone dark. I have a thought or two for posts. (Though, that's about it...literally...) I was going to make some comments on the fact that there are NO Disney animated films for Oscars this year. Not even the Pixar release Cars 2. Is that fair? I suppose. Perhaps I'll get to do an entry on the topic before the Academy Awards near the end of February.

But for now I think I'll just concentrate on getting my ankle better and getting back on my feet. Again, literally...

*****

Disney Film: Experiencing TOY STORY (the first) again

Last night, the Disney channel was showing Toy Story in prime time, and when I got home from work, my boys were planted in front of the TV watching intently. I sat down across from my wife at the island in the kitchen, and I noticed that she continually shifted her attention to the action on the screen.

Finally I sat down between the boys and let myself get pulled into the movie again. It is far from my first time watching it, and it is not my kids' first time either. But the film is simply entrancing. It grabs you and you can't not watch!

I came in too close to the end, really. Buzz and Woody were in Sid's room, trying to escape before he awoke. Then there is the scene where the toys break the rules, and then the frantic chase to get onto the moving truck. Finally, the happy ending and the arrival of the puppy.

If I were to relate the story to someone totally unfamiliar with the movie, they'd probably say, "well, that's a nice story" or something like that. But the movie transcends the simplicity of the tale. It becomes something so much more, even today, after seeing Pixar's digital magic worked over and over, and seeing digital special effects that blow your mind! When it came out, the technology to create such a film was new, but Pixar infused it with something more than tech savvy - they gave it heart - the same heart that we see in so many Disney releases.

*****

Disney Film: The Muppets

I took my kids to see The Muppets last Friday night. I wasn't planning to go; the idea of seeing the Muppets wasn't on the top of my wishlist. I don't think of Muppets and think "Christmas must-see".

But I read the blog entry at FutureProbe, where it was given a fairly enthusiastic thumbs-up, and my kids really were pretty excited about seeing it, so we picked that one over Arthur, Hugo and Puss In Boots>.

I'm glad we saw it. It was a lot of fun. Jokes aimed high and low; I found myself laughing at stuff and my kids would look at me like, "what was funny about that?" Several times. On the other hand, they laughed hard at a few things that, well, that just brought a smile to my face, as much for their reaction as to the onscreen joke. (Don't ask me what these were. I don't remember anymore.)

It isn't high concept stuff. It was just a fun little story about trying to save the Muppets Studio from a bad guy. Reminded me a little of The Blues Brothers with the whole "we're getting the band back together", needing to raise money quick through the use of a "show". I wonder if it has anything to do with Frank Oz's involvement in the original Muppets show and with the Blues Brothers movie?

I don't put this up there with the stuff we get from Pixar routinely, or even most of the stuff we've gotten from Disney Animation, but it was a good, fun movie, and I certainly didn't feel like I wasted our money on it! (In other words, it was worth seeing in the theater.)

*****