The Hunger Games

Oh, yes, the third book was mostly filled with filler. And there were many opprotunities to develope her character, and the whole idea of telling the story in first-person narration should have been used for her advantage. Instead, we see that she is a terrible person inside and out. People can argue that she's a teenager, but if she wants to play adult, then she better act like one. It's book like these that make me dread love triangles; it was completely unnessasary and didn't aid the characters in any way.

 

Regarding Katniss's likability... you have to understand her situation. It was far from ideal. She acknowledges from the very beginning that she is not special, or a particularly great person, but she's thrust into this situation where tons of people hold her up as this amazing hero.

Just imagine that...you've lived a depressing life and have very low self esteem, and then that happens. Emotionally, it must have been very confusing. Part of why Katniss's character in the books seemed so blocked-off is because she was. Ultimately, Katniss was relatable in many respects, and she did the best she could with what she had, and in the end, that was all she could do.

Think about it for a second, over the course of the three books...what could she have really done better? What should she have done different? Not a lot. She did her best.

Ultimately, this story was not about Katniss, it was about Panem. So the fact that Katniss was pretty much a massive сunt starting from the second half of the second book didn't really bother me, I cared more about what happened to Panem.

Also, the author was forced by the publishing company to dramatize the love triangle. Which I was also pretty much indifferent about.

 

She was like that from the very beginning, or at least, that's how I noticed it. That's not good writing though, having a character that means nothing. As a reader, I feel that I'm suppose to care if Katnis succeeds, therefore, caring for the fate of Panem. She never evolved though, and her attitude made me want to see her die. And that's still no escuse for a half-assed love triangle.Even if you have to do something like that, at least give it more effort and do something that you can be proud of.

And, yeah, she may have it rough, but in the world that is described in the book, it seems like it's like that for almost everyone. There are few other characters mentioned, so I don't really know what life was for most of them. Gale had it much worse off than Katnis did in that situation, but he didn't complain his problems to everyone. He at least was a decent person, who did the best he could in a bad situation. Katnis, well, was just a brat. Even knowing her friend was doing a lot more than she was, she still thought only of her problems.

 

Here's where I sort of have to disagree. Katniss is no defacto hero, and part of that is what makes her a good character. She's no Mary sue (or Gary Stu, Peeta being a close example of) and I feel like she adds the practical and logical aspect of a protagonist, rather than being always alturistic and noble out of some unspoken morality. She's realistic.

The romance was also realistic and in accordance with the setting. For the most part.

As for calling Katniss a brat. I also disagree. Most of what the books consist of is screwing Katniss over. Not only physically, but also mentally and emotionally.

 

She may have been confused within the love triangle but there was no way of really seeing who she really and truly cared for. She continued to go back and forth between the two different guys, Gale and Peeta. The only way she had decided was that the guys made the choice for her and I don't know if she really wanted to accept that fact completely. What if she feels regret about being with the guy she ended up with? What if she realizes that she used both of them and thinks that she doesn't deserve either one of them? The book never explains the conflict she is having with herself. She herself doesn't even know if she loves Gale or Peeta. It seems to me that she "thought" she loved them because Katniss knew that they loved her. Did she not want to feel that awkwardness between them so she try to force herself to believe that she loved both of the boys?

 

I didn't think she was like that in the beginning. I liked her in the first book, she lived her entire life to keep her family alive, volunteered for her sister, and was a great anti-capitol protagonist during the games. Then she kind of started to suck.

I'm kind of glad the love triangle was by the wayside. It's better that it wasn't the focus of the book. I didn't really care about it.

It was like that for most people in District Twelve, the rest didn't have it that bad. Gale is more collected, but I still think Katniss did what she could for her situation. Katniss wasn't always thinking of her problems, she always related them to what was going on with the Capitol. For instance,

Spoiler

when she is concerned that she isn't good enough to be the Mockingjay. At first it seems like a simple issue of self esteem, but she is legitimately concerned that she is going to ruin everything.

 

It is true that being in the place she was made her who she was but Katniss never tried to rebel against the capital until she realized other people were trying to do it. She wasn't the leader of the rebellion that everyone assumed she was. Katniss was the follower of the leader until the real leader forced her to become the leader of the rebellion and she had no clue what she was doing to lead. She, again, was still following and trying to figure out what the **** she was supposed to do.

 

I don't think I can bring myself to watch the movie. I'm afraid it will be another Eragon. The book was really good though.

 

You should give it a shot, at least. I haven't seen Eragon, so I don't know what your complaints with it are, but the Hunger Games movie was pretty loyal to the book and was good in its own right.

 

:0 well, i guess that decides it.

And eragon was just really bad. They couldn't stay true to the book. It was sad.

 

And guess what came out today!

 

loved this movie but i didnt really care for the seizure the director had while directing the action sequences. i can understand doing it for the gory bits so it wouldnt be 'R' but still...couldve done better than that. it made me sick!

agreed, biggest let down of my life. :/

 

Now that I think about it, other than the "go kill each other on live TV" thing there are many similarities with it and Battle Royal if you paid close attention enough to notice them and if you've seen them both on the same day. I wont say what they are because I dont want to spoil anything but are you really telling the truth Suzanne Collins?

 

The idea of forcing people to fight against each other isn't really something that's uncommon in literature. Now, I've read about half of Battle Royale and have seen some similarities between the two, but that's just because they share the same idea. However the two ate completely different in tone, pacing, and even story telling.

It's like saying that J.K. Rowing is completely ripping off C.S. Lewis because they're both stories about magic.

 

I dont know if Battle Royal (book) has the same ending as the movie (Battle Royal) so.... wait until you get to the ending and tell me what you notice about the two series.

 

Okay.

And to add to my whole "this story is used before" discussion, I thought if another example: Future Diary (Mirai Nikki). The concept was used very well, in my opinion, and showed that it didn't have to involve any kind of dystopian world or government.

 

Bump ! I haven' t read the books, I just watched the movie. It reminded me of Stephen King' s Running Man and The Long Walk, which were crapping all over real TV before it even existed, mixed with Battle Royal and a Twilight touch. I stumbled upon this today :