According to the Globe, the movie is good, but the book is still better. This is usual for most film adaptations of books. The author says that readers of the book, "Hunger Games," will be satisfied by the compromises Hollywood has made with keeping the story true to itself. However, for non-readers, they will have a nice night at the movies, then wondering what the fuss was all about.
A line I like from this article is: "This is not a movie on fire, and it should have been." I think this was an excellent film adaptation because all of the essential pieces and scenes from the book included in the film. At the same time, I felt shocked, outraged, and with my stomach in my throat with the description of things occurring in the book. The movie did not give me this kind of reaction whatsoever. Was this because I knew what was about to happen from reading the book, or did the film lack that "fire"?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.