My confession

Nytmare

David Jose
I really enjoyed the first half of the first book and the hinted at promise of dealing with issues of social justice and faults in the entertainment mega-industry; but once things changed gears into the "game" part of the story it got incredibly bland, and boring for me. I enjoyed it enough however to grab the second book and put it down within the first dozen pages because all of the character growth and strength from the first book appeared to have been tossed out the window so that they could tread the same boring "I'm just a little girl who doesn't want to be in love with two dudes" story I thought I had finished muddling through a half a book earlier.

I went into the first movie expecting it to have separated the wheat from the chaff, but I think that, aside from showcasing Jennifer Lawrence's amazing talent and even more amazing humility, the film was just another piece of overproduced garbage.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Zombie_Babies

First Post
I will not see or read The Hunger Games cuz I've already read and seen The Lord of the Flies and Battle Royale. A story can only be recycled so many times, yanno? Srsly, like, write something new or something.
 


Bagpuss

Legend
I will not see or read The Hunger Games cuz I've already read and seen The Lord of the Flies and Battle Royale. A story can only be recycled so many times, yanno? Srsly, like, write something new or something.

It has nothing in common with Lord of the Flies, the comparison with Battle Royale is fairer, but BR the focus stays on the island, in the HG series it at least explores the society around the actual competition. So it is a very different story even if they share similar themes.
 

Nellisir

Hero
A story can only be recycled so many times, yanno?

No.

"Only those with no memory insist on their originality" - Coco Chanel
"Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal." - TS Eliot
"There is nothing new except what has been forgotten" - Marie Antoinette
"All novels are sequels; influence is bliss." - Michael Chabon
"“Every story has already been told. Once you've read Anna Karenina, Bleak House, The Sound and the Fury, To Kill a Mockingbird and A Wrinkle in Time, you understand that there is really no reason to ever write another novel. Except that each writer brings to the table, if she will let herself, something that no one else in the history of time has ever had." - Anna Quindlen [Commencement Speech; Mount Holyoke College, May 23, 1999]
"A facility for quotation covers the absence of original thought." - Dorothy L. Sayers
 
Last edited:

Zombie_Babies

First Post
What if they make a pr0n version also titled The Hunger Games?

That's, like, totes different brah.

It has nothing in common with Lord of the Flies, the comparison with Battle Royale is fairer, but BR the focus stays on the island, in the HG series it at least explores the society around the actual competition. So it is a very different story even if they share similar themes.

I disagree about the LoF thing, obviously. That said, BR also places a large focus on the society in the story. Hell, that's a pretty big point of the work in the first place. That's all told through the story on the island, of course, but it's still there.

No.

"Only those with no memory insist on their originality" - Coco Chanel
"Immature poets imitate; mature poets steal." - TS Eliot
"There is nothing new except what has been forgotten" - Marie Antoinette
"All novels are sequels; influence is bliss." - Michael Chabon
"“Every story has already been told. Once you've read Anna Karenina, Bleak House, The Sound and the Fury, To Kill a Mockingbird and A Wrinkle in Time, you understand that there is really no reason to ever write another novel. Except that each writer brings to the table, if she will let herself, something that no one else in the history of time has ever had." - Anna Quindlen [Commencement Speech; Mount Holyoke College, May 23, 1999]
"A facility for quotation covers the absence of original thought." - Dorothy L. Sayers

I would take your objection more seriously had you used your own words to elucidate it.
 

Nellisir

Hero
I would take your objection more seriously had you used your own words to elucidate it.
The belief that a story "can only be recycled so many times" is so fundamentally misplaced that I don't think anything I could say would have any meaning. If you believe it, I can't change your mind, and if you don't believe it, then you're being trollish. The best I can do is say that the book was pretty good, the movie was pretty damned good, and reading the book contributes a lot of meaning to the movie. I've seen Battle Royale, and Hunger Games is not it. I've read Lord of the Flies, and Hunger Games is decidedly not it. I have not yet read Battle Royale, but inferring from the movie, Battle Royale is very much introspective and self-contained within the arena, while the Hunger Games are much more outward looking and concerned with the society that creates them. It's a dysotopian storyline as well as a maturation/child-adult transitional one. LotF and BR are much stronger on the maturation connotations; the society around them are functionally nonexistent.
 


Zombie_Babies

First Post
The belief that a story "can only be recycled so many times" is so fundamentally misplaced that I don't think anything I could say would have any meaning. If you believe it, I can't change your mind, and if you don't believe it, then you're being trollish. The best I can do is say that the book was pretty good, the movie was pretty damned good, and reading the book contributes a lot of meaning to the movie. I've seen Battle Royale, and Hunger Games is not it. I've read Lord of the Flies, and Hunger Games is decidedly not it. I have not yet read Battle Royale, but inferring from the movie, Battle Royale is very much introspective and self-contained within the arena, while the Hunger Games are much more outward looking and concerned with the society that creates them. It's a dysotopian storyline as well as a maturation/child-adult transitional one. LotF and BR are much stronger on the maturation connotations; the society around them are functionally nonexistent.

Of course I believe it - it's why I cited it as my reason for not wanting to see or read HG. And, obviously, it's true at least for me.

Also obviously, the works are not exactly the same. If you think that's what I'm saying you're being rather silly, dontchathink? Cuz it's not. The overall story, the approach taken and, on some levels, the message that's being delivered are all similar enough to make them essentially the same damned thing. One is simply a tweaked version of its predecessor. That's fine, I suppose, but it's also not deserving of the praise I've seen given. Hell, it's not the author's idea. If I add a little paint to a Dali that doesn't make me his equal and that's essentially what's been done here.

I also don't think you're seeing Battle Royale properly as it most assuredly involves aspects of the world beyond the island. Again, the island wouldn't be used for what it's used for if the people outside weren't as they were. The book, though, may be the better source here. There are some rather significant differences between it and the movie.

I would take your objection more seriously had you read or watched the story you're objecting to.

I have - twice (er, four times if you count the movies) ... when it was called The Lord of the Flies or Battle Royale. ;)
 

Nellisir

Hero
Of course I believe it - it's why I cited it as my reason for not wanting to see or read HG. And, obviously, it's true at least for me.
As I said, it's pointless for me to say anything; you've already decided what the truth will be.

The overall story, the approach taken and, on some levels, the message that's being delivered are all similar enough to make them essentially the same damned thing. One is simply a tweaked version of its predecessor. ...but it's also not deserving of the praise I've seen given.
And again, I'd take your opinion more seriously if you had actually read or watched The Hunger Games. As it stands, right or wrong, your opinion is uninformed.

...Battle Royale... most assuredly involves aspects of the world beyond the island. Again, the island wouldn't be used for what it's used for if the people outside weren't as they were. The book, though, may be the better source here. There are some rather significant differences between it and the movie.
That wouldn't surprise me. There often are. What's visible of the outside world in the movie (including the soldiers, the technology, the fashion and culture) appears more or less identical to today. Given that, and the fact that the "battle royale" is broadcast, it would appear to be a dystopian society that utilizes violence as entertainment and propoganda. See also Death Race 2000, Running Man, The Long Walk, etc, etc. For additional (and better) dystopian devaluation of human life and the transition from child to adult, see Kazuo Ishiguro's Never Let Me Go.

(Wikipedia says it's 1997 in an alternate timeline. Not sure that there's a significant difference between alternate timeline dystopia and near-future dystopia except that you can handwave a "history" into existence without having to deal with getting from "here" (current day) to "there" (the event). Definitely pushes it further towards SF; might weaken it as a social critique, since you're explicitly no longer dealing with a consequence of "our" society).

I thought I might have Battle Royale on my shelves, but it doesn't look like it. I'll think about picking it up. I've seen plenty of used copies for sale.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

Top