Acclaimed Novel Hits Bullseye on Big Screen: ‘Hunger Games’ Flies Straight, Far

Movies are not books, and books are not movies — each has its own place, and its own people. So when the world of film tries to absorb a book (say, for instance, Suzanne Collins’s almost unfathomably successful Hunger Games trilogy of novels) it is often considered a Nanking-style rape of everything the book stood for. But this need not be so, and, as The Hunger Games (the film) proves, movie adaptations of books can not only remain faithful to the books they come from but even rival them in terms of entertainment value and emotion. 

If you’ve somehow managed to dodge the ubiquitous buzz about the trilogy of novels and the film (whose sequel is already being planned), here’s a primer: in a dystopian vision of North America separated in 12 districts, each district offers up a teenager as a tribute to the totalitarian government. The teenagers fight to the death in a televised competition called the Hunger Games. Katniss Everdeen (a smoldering, stunning Jennifer Lawrence), a rebellious archer from District 12, volunteers for the games as a substitute for her sister Primrose, who gets selected at only 12 years of age. She and the male tribute, the smitten baker Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutcherson) head off to the nation’s capital to train for and then participate in the sadistic tournament of teen bloodshed, hoping one of them will return the sole victor.

Although it takes a little while for Lawrence to play her full hand in terms of acting, by the end of the film it’s clear that her portrayal of bold heroine Katniss is the center of gravity for the movie: Lawrence is always radiating authentic emotion, whether it’s during a tense dinner in the Capital or in close-up shots while dangers rise in the Hunger Games arena. Her character comes alive in ways which, to be perfectly honest, she never did in the novel. But it doesn’t hurt that she’s always opposite a charismatic supporting cast including Lenny Kravitz as clothing designer Cinna or Woody Harrelson as the tributes’ drunken but wise mentor Haymitch Abernathy. Hutcherson’s portrayal as Peeta is the best he could do for such a flimsy character, but at times I felt like I was looking right through him.

The Hunger Games needs a special treatment as far as films go, because the books are more swift and intense than Twilight or Harry Potter (both of whose movies pale in comparison to Hunger Games). Director Gary Ross seemed to know this, because where Potter and Twilight are filmed in boxy, restricted styles, this film features a good deal of engrossing shaky-camera moments (but don’t worry, Cloverfield haters; these shots are more like those you’d find in a very personal documentary) and unique cinematographic moments. For example, when a major ally of Katniss’s passes in the arena, the next minutes show not just the character’s death but the aftermath it incites in the character’s home district. It’s unique, and it’s engaging, and it’s a far cry from anything you’d find in Potter.

At its worst, The Hunger Games clips along a bit too fast and feels a little bit slippery, but at its best it’s a movie worth seeing regardless of what you think about the books. Lawrence leads a dream team of actors into an action-packed but grippingly emotional flick whose moments, high and low, stay with the viewer after it’s over. This film has done something very rare: it has captured the permanent, lasting essence of a well-told story, usually reserved for books and books alone. Score: 8/10.

Jake Bittle / A&E Editor