![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
shadowkatFinished watching Catching Fire, which was a whole lot better than both the book and the first film The Hunger Games. It was tighter.
It also reminded me why the other YA dystopian novels don't work for me. They miss the point of Suzanne Collins series. Collins' series focuses on the effect of violence on children and innocence. Her series is in some respects an allegory on the horror of war and violence on society and humanity. Also how a society that gets off on watching violence and lives off of the deaths of others...will eventually collaspe in on itself, until it just repeats the same pattern again and again.
The other YA dystopian series seem to lose track of that - as far as I can tell. Her story is steeped in metaphorical allegory - most of which are about the horror of violence and torture. And it does not end happily. Katniss and Peeta, and all the others are forever damaged by it.
In addition - Collins series parodies the societal obsession with celebrity, while depicting how the celebrity culture lives an absurd life of luxury and excess, while millions starve.
The emptiness of a culture that worships money, fame, and physical beauty...and craves stories of star-crossed lovers, even if they aren't true. To fill that empty pit.
Its those aspects that set Collins novel apart from all the rest. What the others have in common is the fascist society and the political upheaval, and the lone rebel kid who fights against the horde. Or the poor kid who fights against the privileged. What they appear to be lacking is the theme of anti-violence, and the critique of the societal worship of celebrity and fascination with series such as Fear Factor, Survivor, or other reality series - where people are pitted against one another.
Reminds me a little of Buffy the Vampire Slayer and how it distinguished itself from the series and novels that followed. Buffy was about a young woman confronting demons, bullying, authority, and in a way girl-power or equality of gender. The series that follow it, Vampire Diaries, Twilight, Vampire Academy, etc ...seem to lose track of that aspect, and focus on the star-crossed romance or the male vampires. It's why that show stands out.
It's hard to articulate. And it's late, so I'm not sure I did it well. But watching this movie reminded me of why The Hunger Games series interested me, while I have not been able to read any of the others. Mileage probably varies on this.
It also reminded me why the other YA dystopian novels don't work for me. They miss the point of Suzanne Collins series. Collins' series focuses on the effect of violence on children and innocence. Her series is in some respects an allegory on the horror of war and violence on society and humanity. Also how a society that gets off on watching violence and lives off of the deaths of others...will eventually collaspe in on itself, until it just repeats the same pattern again and again.
The other YA dystopian series seem to lose track of that - as far as I can tell. Her story is steeped in metaphorical allegory - most of which are about the horror of violence and torture. And it does not end happily. Katniss and Peeta, and all the others are forever damaged by it.
In addition - Collins series parodies the societal obsession with celebrity, while depicting how the celebrity culture lives an absurd life of luxury and excess, while millions starve.
The emptiness of a culture that worships money, fame, and physical beauty...and craves stories of star-crossed lovers, even if they aren't true. To fill that empty pit.
Its those aspects that set Collins novel apart from all the rest. What the others have in common is the fascist society and the political upheaval, and the lone rebel kid who fights against the horde. Or the poor kid who fights against the privileged. What they appear to be lacking is the theme of anti-violence, and the critique of the societal worship of celebrity and fascination with series such as Fear Factor, Survivor, or other reality series - where people are pitted against one another.
Reminds me a little of Buffy the Vampire Slayer and how it distinguished itself from the series and novels that followed. Buffy was about a young woman confronting demons, bullying, authority, and in a way girl-power or equality of gender. The series that follow it, Vampire Diaries, Twilight, Vampire Academy, etc ...seem to lose track of that aspect, and focus on the star-crossed romance or the male vampires. It's why that show stands out.
It's hard to articulate. And it's late, so I'm not sure I did it well. But watching this movie reminded me of why The Hunger Games series interested me, while I have not been able to read any of the others. Mileage probably varies on this.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2014-03-11 10:47 pm (UTC)The only current YA novels that sparked my interest were:
The Harry Potter Series
The Hunger Games Series
The Fault in Our Stars
The reason? They were different. And they dealt with themes and characters that worked for me.
I'd heartily recommend all three of the above, for different reasons.
Of the three listed above, John Green's The Fault in Our Stars is most likely the best written. It is not a fantasy novel, but a novel about two kids dying of cancer who fall in love while pursuing an author of their favorite novel. It has some interesting things to say about fandom and obsession with stories.
The Hunger Games - I found to be different for the reasons I stated above. It's told in first person - you are in Katniss' pov throughout.
Which is limiting, because Katniss has shut herself down emotionally for obvious reasons - she's scared to death. But it is also interesting because it depicts what violence and torture do to a person - how it shuts them down. The movies in some respects are easier - because you are in more than one point of view.
I preferred the novel The Hunger Games to Catching Fire - because Catching Fire spent a lot of time on a train jumping from place to place and with Peeta mooning over Katniss, which frankly got old (particularly if you aren't shipping Peeta and Katniss, which I wasn't.) They managed to cut that bit down considerably in the movie.
Also the book spent more time on side-details like the slaves serving in the Capital, who had no tongue. And the amount of plastic surgery the citizens of the Capital had done. And there was more of the tributes - Johanna, Finnick, Bebe, and the others - descriptions of what they wore and more animosity - the tightened that considerably.
I preferred the movie Catching Fire to the film The Hunger Games, because the first film had a hand-held camera that was frankly jarring to watch, and did not flow well. Also some of the editing didn't quite work. This film flowed better and was less jarring. Also, the characters felt a bit more developed.
But mainly, I liked the second film better because it underlined what I liked in the book - which was the decadence of the Capital, violence and killing as sport, and well celebrity worship or need to know everything about someone's private love life - turning them into an object for your entertainment. Which I felt the movie subtly pulled off without getting preachy. The book gets it across too - actually - but not quite as well, in my opinion.
So, I recommend the books, but with the above caveats.