My brother tells me The Hunger Games is a chick flick in disguise. Avoid if you have literal or figurative testicular fortitude.
2012 films
- ChewySmokey
- BCI Member
Jerk, on 26 March 2012 - 04:39 PM, said:
My brother tells me The Hunger Games is a chick flick in disguise. Avoid if you have literal or figurative testicular fortitude.
"Disguise"? What kind of moron can't see that the movie is a total chick flick? I'm seeing it because I'm reading the book, I want to see just how fucked it is from the book. A friend of mine saw it and told be just how off it is; there is much canon-rape.
- #202
- 26 March 2012 - 04:58 PM
- Leaving_a_Comment
- Member
Chewy I've heard the exact opposite on how close it is to the book, all my friends who have read it and seen it agree its pretty dang close, they only change a few minor details and had to add a few things to make the transition from first person to more third person. My only deal with it is that good god shakey cam shakey cam. Seriously, sit in the middle of the theater and back when watching it cause I almost got sick sitting in the front of the theater.
As for it being a chick movie....eh the "love triangle" is majorly down played in it, like practically non existent and if you have read the books then you know
Over all the story was good and the actors really did a good job in it, but for me at least the first act before they get to the actually arena was a tad bit long, but when the fighting finally showed up it was so shakey it was a bit sickening. But honestly I would tell everyone to go see it, it really is good and it pulls you into the story even if you haven't read the book. As a stand alone story it's pretty solid.
4 winking Augustuses outta five.
As for it being a chick movie....eh the "love triangle" is majorly down played in it, like practically non existent and if you have read the books then you know
Spoiler
with only hints occasionally of other girly things like costume design, seriously look at the detail the put into the girl's dresses they are beautiful. Over all the story was good and the actors really did a good job in it, but for me at least the first act before they get to the actually arena was a tad bit long, but when the fighting finally showed up it was so shakey it was a bit sickening. But honestly I would tell everyone to go see it, it really is good and it pulls you into the story even if you haven't read the book. As a stand alone story it's pretty solid.
4 winking Augustuses outta five.
- #203
- 26 March 2012 - 05:09 PM
- ChewySmokey
- BCI Member
The gore that is in the book and the mockingjay pin are both incredibly downplayed in the movie. Those two are big things in the book. 
This post has been edited by ChewySmokey: 26 March 2012 - 05:14 PM
- #204
- 26 March 2012 - 05:14 PM
- falconboy99
- BCI Member
I hated the ending of the last book, but i'm going to watch it with my web group anyway because I want to see how good they adapted it.
Spoiler
- #205
- 26 March 2012 - 05:22 PM
- Jerk
- Member
ChewySmokey, on 26 March 2012 - 04:58 PM, said:
"Disguise"? What kind of moron can't see that the movie is a total chick flick? I'm seeing it because I'm reading the book, I want to see just how fucked it is from the book. A friend of mine saw it and told be just how off it is; there is much canon-rape.
the trailers marketed it as a sci-fi action flick, I think it's a fair mistake if you've never read the books
- #206
- 26 March 2012 - 05:29 PM
- Kaxbe
- Member
The only thing making it a chick flick is the love-triangle that isn't hardly even there in the movie and Katniss' love for her sister. aaaaand that's it.
I thought the movie was okay. It wasn't game-changing or anything spectacular. Disappointed with the casting of Katniss and Peeta and pretty much anyone in District 12, but whatever. Hollywood's gonna Hollywood and they fucking suck,.
I thought the movie was okay. It wasn't game-changing or anything spectacular. Disappointed with the casting of Katniss and Peeta and pretty much anyone in District 12, but whatever. Hollywood's gonna Hollywood and they fucking suck,.
- #207
- 26 March 2012 - 08:01 PM
- Lux Aeterna
- Member
Relating to The Hunger Games, I'm going to agree with Leaving_A_Comment. It's not really a chick flick. I've read all three books and watched the movie and the romance is more of a subplot if anything--although I suppose it becomes more pivotal later. The Hunger Games is a lot of things, but it isn't a chick flick.
As for the movie, I absolutely loved it. I only noticed a few things in particular from the books that it missed, e.g. the mention of Avoxes or when Katniss
But these were minor details that didn't make or break the movie. The only thing that annoyed me was how little evidence there was of the result of Katniss blowing up the land mines, aka
Otherwise the movie was great, and if anything the movie placed more evidence on the action than the book!
Adaptations, in general, will not be as good as the original. I went into the movie accepting that and had a lot of fun seeing one of my favorite series on the big screen.
Also, somewhat relevant--I personally liked the series all the way through. Even the third book.
As for the movie, I absolutely loved it. I only noticed a few things in particular from the books that it missed, e.g. the mention of Avoxes or when Katniss
Spoiler
But these were minor details that didn't make or break the movie. The only thing that annoyed me was how little evidence there was of the result of Katniss blowing up the land mines, aka
Spoiler
Otherwise the movie was great, and if anything the movie placed more evidence on the action than the book!
Adaptations, in general, will not be as good as the original. I went into the movie accepting that and had a lot of fun seeing one of my favorite series on the big screen.
Also, somewhat relevant--I personally liked the series all the way through. Even the third book.
- #210
- 26 March 2012 - 08:14 PM
- Leaving_a_Comment
- Member
With Shakey Cam Gabe, tons and tons of shakey cam.
- #212
- 26 March 2012 - 11:21 PM
- KAS Bat
- Member
These days, when ever I go to see a movie that's a film of a book, I go prepared to be disappointed, no matter what my friends or the film critics say. It's rare for Hollywood to produce something from a book that appeases the original readers and fans these days. 
- #216
- 26 March 2012 - 11:30 PM
- Leaving_a_Comment
- Member
Because the fans don't get the fact that no Hollywood can not an will not produce something exactly like the book, and we need to learn to embrace the changes or criticize them for something deeper than, "OMG thizz is not liek the original at all!!1" Movies from books will always be an adaptation and we have to realize there are limitations to what they can do, especially in a work that is originally written in 1st person.
- #217
- 26 March 2012 - 11:34 PM
Wasn't george lucas gonna release some star wars shit remakes?
- #218
- 26 March 2012 - 11:37 PM
- KAS Bat
- Member
I get that, which is why I now always expect something different. I'm just one of those annoying people who build up expectations what I think is in there even when I know I shouldn't. Although what I really don't like is when the films majorly alter things, just because it looks cooler that way or to appeal to the larger audiences.
Curse you Box-Office. Why must your glorious profits tempt the directors and script writers so.
Curse you Box-Office. Why must your glorious profits tempt the directors and script writers so.
- #219
- 26 March 2012 - 11:40 PM
- falconboy99
- BCI Member
Lux Aeterna, on 26 March 2012 - 08:14 PM, said:
Relating to The Hunger Games, I'm going to agree with Leaving_A_Comment. It's not really a chick flick. I've read all three books and watched the movie and the romance is more of a subplot if anything--although I suppose it becomes more pivotal later. The Hunger Games is a lot of things, but it isn't a chick flick.
As for the movie, I absolutely loved it. I only noticed a few things in particular from the books that it missed, e.g. the mention of Avoxes or when Katniss
But these were minor details that didn't make or break the movie. The only thing that annoyed me was how little evidence there was of the result of Katniss blowing up the land mines, aka
Otherwise the movie was great, and if anything the movie placed more evidence on the action than the book!
Adaptations, in general, will not be as good as the original. I went into the movie accepting that and had a lot of fun seeing one of my favorite series on the big screen.
Also, somewhat relevant--I personally liked the series all the way through. Even the third book.
As for the movie, I absolutely loved it. I only noticed a few things in particular from the books that it missed, e.g. the mention of Avoxes or when Katniss
Spoiler
But these were minor details that didn't make or break the movie. The only thing that annoyed me was how little evidence there was of the result of Katniss blowing up the land mines, aka
Spoiler
Otherwise the movie was great, and if anything the movie placed more evidence on the action than the book!
Adaptations, in general, will not be as good as the original. I went into the movie accepting that and had a lot of fun seeing one of my favorite series on the big screen.
Also, somewhat relevant--I personally liked the series all the way through. Even the third book.
It's usually never better than the books because the fans who read the books expect way too much, but the people who've never read them don't have any big expectations.
Kaxbe, on 26 March 2012 - 08:21 PM, said:
I just can't wait to see how they're gonna handle the prostitution in later movies
- #222
- 27 March 2012 - 02:49 AM
- Lux Aeterna
- Member
falconboy99, on 27 March 2012 - 02:49 AM, said:
It's usually never better than the books because the fans who read the books expect way too much, but the people who've never read them don't have any big expectations.
Somewhat late of me, but anyway--I understand and accept that there are simply some things that can't make it in the movie due to time limitations, fiscal worries, or as mentioned previously, the transition from first person to third person.
But there are some things that simply didn't need to be cut. The sleeping serum part would have taken less time than waiting, I assume. They could have mentioned what those wolves were--IIRC they just threw the wolves in there without any explanation.
Again, they are little things that don't change the fact that I like the movie, but sometimes it feels like they left things out just because. And of course the movies won't match up to the books in terms of goodness--it can't. Or if it could (by some way that I'm unaware of), it didn't. That's just because of certain limitations. But that doesn't mean the movie wasn't good, and it definitely doesn't mean that I didn't like it.
- #223
- 28 March 2012 - 10:47 PM
- Leaving_a_Comment
- Member
Well I don't think they were just thrown in, it was obvious that they had been changing the battle field as they choose through out the movie so throwing in the wolves made sense, though if they had kept
Though really some of the CGI hurt me, like when they are first being introduced and there is a shot that pans up to President Snow? Really conspicuous CGI there. But at least the wolves had a reason to look terrible. Well okay it wasn't horrible but I really didn't think it was that amazing.
Spoiler
Though really some of the CGI hurt me, like when they are first being introduced and there is a shot that pans up to President Snow? Really conspicuous CGI there. But at least the wolves had a reason to look terrible. Well okay it wasn't horrible but I really didn't think it was that amazing.
- #224
- 29 March 2012 - 03:50 PM
- Leaving_a_Comment
- Member
Okay while I am digging Russian, sword-wielding Santa, good God that Easter Bunny scared the shit outta me. But it looks pretty sweet and talk about some awesome casting I can get behind.
- #226
- 29 March 2012 - 07:32 PM
- Leaving_a_Comment
- Member
It's Hugh Jackman playing him, its not a joke.
- #228
- 30 March 2012 - 12:55 AM
- LackLuster
- Moderator
Considering how awful I thought the original Total Recall was, I'm looking forward to seeing the remake.
- #231
- 05 April 2012 - 07:16 AM
- LackLuster
- Moderator
Jerk, on 05 April 2012 - 07:39 AM, said:
I just want to see the lady with three tits and the talking tumor. I only remember enough of the original movie to spoil it.
It's not going to be related to the original beyond the idea of a secret agent getting part of his memory back. It's taking place on a future Earth with Future USA and Future China in a economic shitstorm, it's not going to be on Mars.
Don't forget about that Cab driver.
- #233
- 05 April 2012 - 08:25 AM
- ChewySmokey
- BCI Member
My girlfriend and I were browsing the Zune marketplace on my Xbox for a movie to rent. We had a couple in the "maybe" pile until we came across In Time starring Justin Timberlake and she wanted to watch it. I was skeptical because it lasted barely a month in theatres, but I liked the Logan's Run thing they had going on, so we gave it a shot. Halfway through we had to stop watching because it was sooooo bad. Good lord did it suck; the acting, action, and writing was all terrible. The only good thing that came out of it was the satisfaction that she picked a terrible movie for a change (I will never live down Fast Five or Battle LA).
This post has been edited by ChewySmokey: 05 April 2012 - 04:36 PM
- #234
- 05 April 2012 - 04:32 PM
- falconboy99
- BCI Member
Some parts of the Hunger Games movie was shaky. I hate shaky cameras.
- #235
- 06 April 2012 - 01:13 AM
- Kureji-Neko
- Member
Just got back from seeing Marvel's The Avengers.
HO-LY SHHHIT, I'm still on an adrenaline rush.
I can gladly say this movie is the start of this year's season of blockbusters. Joss Whedon really pulled it off.
Had some cosplayers at the midnight; really committed fans, those guys.
ACTION ACTION EXPLOSIONS ACTION TONY SNARK CHRIS HEMSWORTH HOTNESS ACTION EXPLOSIONS SAMUEL. L. JACKSON.
So, yeah discuss what your thoughts were about the movie.
Oh, make sure to use the spoiler captions so people don't rage about
And if you're thinking of going to see it, make sure to stay for the WHOLE movie. Marvel's trend to give out teasers after the credits is pretty well known.
Aderenaline...ugh. It's almost 4am here, so I am going to BED. =__=
HO-LY SHHHIT, I'm still on an adrenaline rush.
I can gladly say this movie is the start of this year's season of blockbusters. Joss Whedon really pulled it off. Had some cosplayers at the midnight; really committed fans, those guys.
ACTION ACTION EXPLOSIONS ACTION TONY SNARK CHRIS HEMSWORTH HOTNESS ACTION EXPLOSIONS SAMUEL. L. JACKSON.
So, yeah discuss what your thoughts were about the movie.
Oh, make sure to use the spoiler captions so people don't rage about
Spoiler
And if you're thinking of going to see it, make sure to stay for the WHOLE movie. Marvel's trend to give out teasers after the credits is pretty well known.
Aderenaline...ugh. It's almost 4am here, so I am going to BED. =__=
- #238
- 04 May 2012 - 07:44 AM
- Corvidae
- Member
Just saw Avengers today myself and really enjoyed it. The final battle at the end was really nice. And expanding that note about Marvel's tendencies of scenes after the credits. There are actually two scenes after the credits of this one (well one half way through the credits the other is all the way at the very end). I also have to say despite never being a Hulk fan I did like the way they did him in this one.
Spoiler
- #240
- 08 May 2012 - 08:59 AM
- ChewySmokey
- BCI Member
My girlfriend and I saw Dark Shadows yesterday. It was pretty bad. For the most part it was a little below average with little laugh-worthy humour, but had an interesting fish-out-water story, then in the last third it just got too stupid to redeem itself. The fight sequence was boring and uninteresting, they threw a bunch of random shit all of the place that left us "oh, okay, I guess that would have been an interesting plot device a lot sooner, kinda", and there were a shit-ton of inconsistencies (mostly involving direct sunlight on him and he doesn't start to burn). I'd give it a 2/5, if you never see it you haven't missed a damn thing. Very disappointing.
- #242
- 15 May 2012 - 04:10 AM
I saw The Avengers the other day. Best part of the whole movie was
The spoiler tag was because that was my favorite part, and I would've been angry if someone else ruined it for me.
Spoiler
I think it definitely has a lot of interesting implications for Bruce as a character. I would post a longer rant, but I've gotta go to school soon.The spoiler tag was because that was my favorite part, and I would've been angry if someone else ruined it for me.
- #244
- 15 May 2012 - 11:16 AM
- ChewySmokey
- BCI Member
Kaxbe, on 15 May 2012 - 10:24 AM, said:
It's your basic "Tim Burton ruins Johnny Dep's career ever so slightly movie".
Just like all the other ones.
Just like all the other ones.
Yeah, I should have known better, but I just couldn't stop hoping...
- #245
- 15 May 2012 - 01:56 PM
- Kaxbe
- Member
Johnny Hurricane, on 15 May 2012 - 11:16 AM, said:
I saw The Avengers the other day. Best part of the whole movie was
The spoiler tag was because that was my favorite part, and I would've been angry if someone else ruined it for me.
Spoiler
I think it definitely has a lot of interesting implications for Bruce as a character. I would post a longer rant, but I've gotta go to school soon.The spoiler tag was because that was my favorite part, and I would've been angry if someone else ruined it for me.
Yes. Easily the best portrayal of Bruce Banner in the movies ever. What I really loved was his relationship with Tony Stark.
Spoiler
- #246
- 15 May 2012 - 04:23 PM
- Leaving_a_Comment
- Member
Really what makes the Avengers is the relationships between the characters, Cap and Stark, Stark and Banner, Banner and Widow, Widow and Hawkeye, and a further look at the relationship between Loki and Thor. Really if you haven't seen the movie yet, DO IT. This movie, at it's core is about relationships, wrapped in fighting with
Let me put this another way, my brother is a prat who hates everything popular and that makes money, and he loved this film. It's not a matter if you will go see it, it's when.
Spoiler
and is a fun experience even for those who might not like pure action movies or super hero flicks. Let me put this another way, my brother is a prat who hates everything popular and that makes money, and he loved this film. It's not a matter if you will go see it, it's when.
This post has been edited by Leaving_a_Comment: 16 May 2012 - 01:39 AM
- #247
- 16 May 2012 - 01:38 AM
- MintyFishbowl
- Member
How good is Mark Ruffalo in comparison to Edward Norton? I haven't seen Avengers yet, but I'm still saddened by the fact that Norton didn't come back as Hulk.
- #249
- 17 May 2012 - 08:39 PM