The Hunger Games

               As I've touched on before in this blog, adapting a book into a movie can be quite difficult. From dealing with scenes that have trouble translating to something visual, to the always painful task of cutting detail in order to create a running time suitable for the story and the audience. Then there's always the challenge of having to do this process with a hugely popular best-seller not only in America, but around the world. This can make any fan nervous as we've seen the good and the bad come from this challenge. From the model franchise of Harry Potter to the not so good Twilight series (yes, I know it's made a fortune and I haven't read the books, but I saw the first one and it was terrible, but feel free to disagree),  the question is whether The Hunger Games was able to live up to its fans expectations.
              Though it has already claimed the top spot at the box-office in its first two weekends, are audience getting what they hoped for when forking over $11 a ticket?  In my opinion they are. Writer/Director Gary Ross (Seabiscuit, Pleasantville) has condensed the story into a very well managed 2 hours and 20 minutes. As with any such story details had to be cut, but it includes all of the important aspects of this story as well as what is needed to continue on to the next story in the trilogy. A huge key in this success is the fact author Suzanne Collins is one of the trio, along with Ross, in adapting the screenplay. There's no doubt having her involved so closely in the adaptation process is what helped keep all the major events that happen in the book, to happen exactly the same way in the movie. Another applauding fact to this script is the way they dealt with the book's first person narrative. Due to this there's a lot of information told to a reader that needs to be shown to a viewer. To solve this the writers used many different ways to portray such info to the audience, from plainly showing a narrative text on the screen to coming up with a whole new scene in general, such as the one when the Tracker Jackers are explained.
              For those who are now lost by the lingo just used and are new to the story, The Hunger Games is set in the futuristic ruins of North America, in the country of Panem. The evil Capitol requires each of its 12 impoverished districts to every year volunteer a boy and a girl between the ages of 12 and 18, chosen via a draft, to fight to the death in an arena (and you thought the US was in rough shape). The story follows Katniss Everdeen, played by Jennifer Lawrence (Winter's Bone, X-Men: First Class), of District 12 who volunteers to fight to save her sister. She is sent along with fellow District 12 tribute Peeta Mellark, played by Josh Hutcherson (The Kids Are All Right). He is a non-threatening looking, but surprisingly strong individual who is yet insecure and has a much bigger role then he could ever imagine. From here the plot line travels parallel to that of the book's, as Katniss must find a way to survive in and out of the games in an ever changing landscape while somehow protecting all of those around her with whom she loves and cares for.
            As for the casting of this movie, which is quite important in highly popular adaptations, I believe the casting people hit their mark with most of the characters. Lawrence is perfect in portraying Katniss as the very self-reliant, reserved, person that she is. Some may not be happy with the choice of Hutcherson as Peeta, but when it comes down to it he's a good fit as he portrays the main important qualities Peeta is supposed to have. Those being his sincerity, loyalty, kindness and sensitivity. He may not be that heart throb some people want, but he's not supposed to be. That's more reserved for Gale (Liam Hemsworth), Katniss' best friend, who from the brief exposure seems to be a good fit.
         The best job casting wise has to go to Haymithch Abernathy, the drunken sad-sack mentor to Katniss and Peeta, who is played by Woody Harrelson (Friends With Benefits). Just think of his character in Zombieland and translate it to this film. It's perfect. Other notables are Stanley Tucci (Easy A) as Caeasar Flickerman, Elizabeth Banks as Effie Trinket, who's hard to even recognize under her Capitol wardrobe, Donald Sutherland as President Snow, and Lenny Kravitz as Katniss' stylist Cinna.
          Overall, I give this movie a thumbs up and 3 1/2 out of 4 stars. For me this movie was pretty much everything I could have hoped it would be when seeing it on the big screen. It's unrealistic to expect it to be exactly like the book. All you can hope for is it's the best version possible when going by the constraints of a movie and this is pretty darn close. What's even better is if you haven't read the book you'll still enjoy this movie. It's that good of a story on its own. However, if you haven't read it there's a good chance the movie will make you want to read it, and that to me is what makes a good adaptation. Just ask Harry Potter. Enjoy!

Editor's Note: Due to my long absence and the fact I have watched a handful of movies in that time I'm not sure which movie I'll review next. As always if I see one in theaters, like The Hunger Games, it gets priority. Otherwise, it could be Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy, The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo or a couple others so stay tuned to see what's next!
 

Friends With Benefits

             Awww relationships, are they ever easy? Do they ever not get complicated? The complexity that is a romantic relationship has developed so many questions and answers and variable solutions that a whole industry has been created. Men trying to understand women and vice versa. The movie industry is no newbie to playing to this facet of human life either.
            Does that paragraph seem oddly too familiar for some reason? Let's be real, probably not because who's going to remember something that lacks any importance. But if it somehow does it's because that's how I started my review for No Strings Attached. Since I'm reviewing a movie with essentially the exact same premise why not cut a few corners right? Don't worry, I'm not going to do that. However, I can't say I wasn't a bit skeptical going into this movie since the former had come out about 5 months before it. I told you Hollywood is no newbie to playing off of the same idea over and over.
           Any who, Friends With Benefits is a movie about exactly what its title says. Justin Timberlake plays Dylan Harper an art director for a small internet company in Los Angeles. Mila Kunis (Black Swan) plays Jamie Rellis, a head hunter for a job agency in New York City, who recruits Dylan for a job at GQ Magazine. She is able to convince Dylan to take the job after his interview by spending the night taking him all around town showing him the sites, and thus sparking their friendship. Things become more intimate down the road when the two decide to take out their sexual frustration on each other. Having both just gotten out of relationships not long before and agreeing they're not ready for a new one, they decide what better way to answer their sexual needs without getting tied down. They set up rules so as to keep themselves from becoming emotionally attached. From here we watch as the two characters both seem to be falling for each other, but are far to afraid to admit it to each other or themselves.
           As I said above I was a bit skeptical going into this movie, but I had heard good things so I figured I should check it out. I'm glad I did because quite frankly, it's hilarious. Most of this is due to the fact it's aimed directly at my generation, from its plot focus to its humor. They even make fun of themselves and the type of movie they're making which I always think is great. As for the actors, Kunis has always been able to be funny going back to her work on That 70s Show and Family Guy, while we all know Timberlake can bring it thanks to his great skits on SNL. Plus, I must admit he's becoming someone I'm enjoying watch act as he's doing a really good job in both comedic and dramatic roles. That bastard, what can't he do?
           This movie has a great little cast of supporting characters around it too. Woody Harrelson (Zombieland) is probably the funniest character in the movie as he plays the gay sports director at GQ alongside Timberlake. It's really too bad he isn't in the movie more. Fair warning, he is vulgar as hell, which was completely unexpected, yet hysterical.  Then there's also Patricia Clarkson (Easy A, One Day) as Jamie's wild promiscuous mom, and Richard Jenkins (Step Brothers) and Jenna Elfman (Dharma and Greg) as Dylan's dad and sister. There's also a great little cameo by Shaun White.
            Overall, I thought this movie nailed it in what it was trying to produce. It delivered strongly on the comedy side, which was its main intent, with jokes that appealed to a mass audience, but struck hard with its target. Then when it needed its romance points it played into those well, whether gimmicky or not, and all the while didn't lose site of what the movie really was and had fun teasing themselves about it.
             I give this film a thumbs up and 3 out of 4 stars. Like I said I believe most people will enjoy this movie but anyone in the young adult range will relate to it more. It's a good date movie as it works great for both sexes. It even has a partial nudity scene of each main character to please each party so you can't go wrong. You can buy this movie on DVD or Blu-Ray now as well as rent it at your local Redbox. Enjoy!

Editor's Note:  My next review will be on the romantic comedy (once again, I know) Crazy, Stupid, Love starring Steve Carell, Julianne Moore, Ryan Gosling, and Emma Stone. Also, the Oscar nominations are being announced tomorrow so be on the lookout for those as well!!!