After suffering through the Twilight
movies, I am very much relieved with how this movie turned out, and
for good reasons. Compared to Twilight, The Hunger Games is far
better written with much more interesting characters, particularly
the lead character of Katniss Everdeen. Unlike the selfish and
pretentious Bella, Katniss is a strong and independent young woman
who can easily fend for herself and is not male-dependent like Bella.
As for the other two male leads, Peeta and Gale, they are also much
stronger characters than Edward and Jacob who aren't just there to
serve as Katniss' love interests. If I haven't got my point across
yet, The Hunger Games has stronger characters than any of the
characters from Twilight.
And with those strong characters also
comes a great cast, most importantly Jennifer Lawrence as Katniss,
who perfectly captures the fierceness and emotion of the character.
Likewise, Josh Hutcherson and Liam Hemsworth do a solid job as Peeta
and Gale, even when the latter is only in the film for about 10
minutes or so. You also can't go wrong with a cast that includes the
likes of Woody Harrelson, Donald Sutherland, and Stanley Tucci. But
of course, I can't talk about this film without looking into the
rather controversial aspect of the movie, and that is the editing and
camerawork during the actual Hunger Games themselves.
Even I have to admit, that is a problem
when we get to the Hunger Games, as most of the fight scenes are shot
close-up and through shaky cam. Editing is also rather fast as well,
which as you might guess, was probably done this way in order to get
a PG-13 rating because this is rather intense material we're dealing
with here. Really, I can kind of ignore the editing and camerawork
because The Hunger Games is a really violent story and this may be
the only way it could have been brought to the screen without landing
an 'R' rating. Also, I attribute this to the fact that director Gary
Ross isn't really known for directing action films. Really, I do
think Ross did a really great job at creating the universe, and in
some areas he even expands the world of Panem. One of the things I
really liked about this movie is that they actually show the Control
Center of the Capitol where the Gamemakers control the Hunger Games,
something that was only referenced in the book.
But there is another thing about this
movie in that there are some things left out that were in the book.
There's no mention of the Avoxes, servants of the Capitol whose
tongues are cut out as punishment for treason, and unlike the novel,
the film isn't told from the perspective of Katniss. But really, the
same can be said for any other major book adaptation. The 'Harry
Potter' films have cut some parts from the books, and this is no
different. But I did notice one big change and that is how the ending
plays out. (WARNING: Spoilers for those who haven't read the book).
In the book, after Katniss and Peeta return home to District 12 after
winning the Hunger Games, Peeta realizes that Katniss was 'faking'
being in love with him to earn sympathy from the audience of Panem.
However, in the movie, this doesn't happen and Katniss and Peeta just
return home. I'm hoping this will be touched upon in 'Catching Fire',
as this is a big part of the story and crucial to the development of
Katniss and Peeta. Even with that, this was a rock-solid adaptation
of a great book to follow in the footsteps of 'Harry Potter', and
that is why The Hunger Games is in my Top 10. I must admit, though,
that I am interested in seeing what director Francis Lawrence will do
with 'Catching Fire' and 'Mockingjay' (the latter being a two-parter
in the wake of 'Harry Potter' and 'Twilight'). Let's just hope he
fixes the camerawork and editing problems.
For Number 8, we have the latest film
from a director responsible for some of the most famous movies ever
and if you're a fan of this man's work, then I assure you that you will
not be disappointed with his latest effort.
8. DJANGO UNCHAINED
Django Unchained is a Quentin Tarantino
movie in every sense of the phrase. It's bold and daring, showing how
Tarantino is unafraid to show content that other directors wouldn't
even dare to show. Of course, as with any Tarantino movie, it's also
pretty bloody, evident just from the final shootout at the end of the
movie. Needless to say, this is a very entertaining movie with a
witty screenplay from Tarantino and well-developed characters. There
are also some really Oscar-worthy performances here. There's
Christoph Waltz, who is pretty much tailor made for a Tarantino
movie, as bounty hunter Dr. King Schultz. But the standout
performance here is by Leonardo DiCaprio as the main antagonist
Calvin Candie, who is hands down one of the best villains of the
year. If you're a Quentin Tarantino film, then this film will not
disappoint.
Like 2011, there were some standout
superhero films this year, and Number 7 is the first of three on this
list. This one in question had me rather worried going in because it
was a reboot of a popular franchise that was completed just a few
years ago. But who would have guessed that I would end up liking this
movie so much?
7. THE AMAZING SPIDER-MAN
Like I said, I was rather worried about
this reboot, because we were only half a decade removed from director
Sam Raimi's last Spider-Man film. I was also a big fan of Raimi's
trilogy (heck, I could accept some of the many problems of Spider-Man
3) and I felt that Marvel was rushing Raimi to make a fourth film,
which of course led to him leaving the project and Marvel instead
deciding to start over, hence this movie. But I was surprised when I
ended up liking this movie more than two of the Raimi films,
Spider-Man 1 and 3. I can't really say that it is as good as Raimi's
best, Spider-Man 2, but I do think that it's on the same level.
The big reason why this take on
Spider-Man works so well is because it's more focused on story and
character development. This is the first movie to show Peter Parker's
parents, whose departure at the beginning of the film drives Peter's
ambition to find out what happened to them. I must admit, however,
that this does lead to my one solitary complaint with the movie in
that this whole subplot of Peter's parents is rather underplayed,
especially when considering that this was a key part of the marketing
for the whole film. Really, all they go into this is to give us a
brief glimpse of an article noting that they died in a plane crash. I
don't know, perhaps they'll delve into this more with the sequel.
As for the two main leads, Andrew
Garfield and Emma Stone are far more compelling to watch than Tobey
Maguire and Kirsten Dunst in the Raimi trilogy. Garfield does an
excellent job as Peter Parker, being the first actor to really give
Spider-Man a sense of humor on film. As for Stone, she is both
radiant and charming as Gwen Stacy, who also gives any other female
comic book love interest a run for their money. Not only does she
help Spider-Man develop a cure for those affected by the Lizard's
serum that turns them into lizards as well, but she also wards the
Lizard off when he tries to catch her by almost lighting him on fire.
Finally, at the end after her father dies and Peter promises him to
keep Gwen 'out of it', she realizes why Peter first tells her that
'he can't see her anymore'. Hands down one of the best movie
girlfriends ever, if not the best.
That's the biggest reason why I like
this new version of Spider-Man. Sure, when looking at it from a story
perspective, this borrows a lot from the first Spider-Man film, but
still does enough to be different. Gwen and her father, Police
Captain George Stacy, are given more substantial roles than they were
given in Spider-Man 3, and in this version, Uncle Ben and Aunt Stacy
(both excellently played by Martin Sheen and Sally Field,
respectively) are a bit more authoritative but still as caring as
they usually are. In fact, I feel that in this version, the death of
Uncle Ben is much more dramatic because unlike the Raimi trilogy,
where most of it happened off-screen, we see it in complete detail
which means that it leaves much more of an impact. All in all, 'The
Amazing Spider-Man' is quite an improvement over the Raimi trilogy in
regards to story and character development and I'm interested to see
where director Marc Webb goes next. Heck, the sequel's already
stacking up in regards to casting, including Dane Dehaan as Harry
Osborn, Shailene Woodley as Mary Jane Watson, and Jamie Foxx as the
villain Electro.
Stay Tuned for Numbers 6 through 4
No comments:
Post a Comment