The Hunger Games

   “Happy Hunger Games!”

   

With those words the dreams of millions of book fans were fulfilled. Suzanne Collins best-selling book series “The Hunger Games” has finally been brought to life on the big screen. And unlike “Twilight” it’s actually pretty good.

   

In the world of Panem, the dystopian future of the United States, twelve districts are forced to send a boy and a girl between the ages of 12 and 18 to compete in a gladiatorial style game. Out of 24 children, only one can win. When her sister is chosen, Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) volunteers in her place for District 12. Her childhood friend Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutcherson) is also chosen.

   

With most books adapted into movies, a wrongly cast actor can break an otherwise good film. Fortunately “The Hunger Games” has a strong cast. Jennifer Lawrence is the perfect fit for Katniss. Stanley Tucci as the vivacious Caesar Flickerman, Donald Sutherland as President Snow and Woody Harrelson as Haymitch Abernathy. What I see on screen is what I imagined when reading the book.

   

And that isn’t restricted to the cast. The world of Panem is wonderfully detailed and the game arena is as beautiful as it is deadly. The scenes they include from the book are fully realized with visual flair. Because of the book’s length and the difficulty of translating to the big screen, the filmmakers chose to ignore some things while focusing on others from the book. It allows the film to be its own entity. It is quite obviously “The Hunger Games” but the film could stand alone without a book to prop it up.

   

But what makes the film good isn’t the cast, it isn’t the loyalty to its source material, it is the content of the movie. The plot, the moral choices that characters make and pay for. As terrifying as it was reading it, seeing it is ten times worse. The rousing music that accompanies the players to the beginning of the games cuts out when the slaughter begins and we are treated to the horror of children killing children for sport. It is visceral, it is gut-wrenching and it is powerful. In other films this sort of unnecessary killing is celebrated, expected even. The residents of the Capitol watch the Hunger Games like we watch the latest “Die Hard” film. “The Hunger Games” treats death like “Saving Private Ryan” did. It wasn’t death; it was the stealing of a life. A life that should have been lived, that deserved to be lived.

   

Book fans will be pleased and new fans will be pleased as well. The few cheesy moments and poor dialogue can be easily overlooked. Just like the book, “The Hunger Games” is an entertaining film with a spattering of social commentary. With the third best domestic opening of any movie ever, “The Hunger Games” is well worth the trial. May the odds be ever in your favor.

3 out of 4 stars

-Christopher O'Connell