The Hunger Games transcends mere shaky cam. It refines it to a pure essecence that you would not beleive possible, making the Bourne triliogy look like a model of clear camera work. It 's difficult to exaggerate how bad the shaky cam in The Hunger Games is. For scenes not set in the capital, you can literally count the number of times the camera is stationary even breifly on the fingers of one hand. This is not an exaggeration, I counted.

Listen to the music in this, then this

Also, interesting thing I noticed about Chrysalis & Lauren Faust. Coincidence?

Also also, yesterday I ended up playing a few games of Hangman with some schoolmates from when I was in high school, so I used the words cadence, changeling, and chrysalis. They guessed the first and last words and almost guessed the middle word, but if any of 'em realized why I chose those words they kept it to themselves.

Also also also, upcoming Target-exclusive Fashion Style toys of Cadance & Shining Armor. "Crystal Empire" is a bit of an odd name for a toy line...

@story So I didn't miss anything since I didn't see it?

At least I'm planning to see Avengers this weekend, and it sounds good.

Or an internet connection.

@Yeller: So the shakey cam is worse than what Michael Bay used for his Live-action Transformers stuff?

I didn't even notice the shaky cam except for maybe the Bloodbath.

It's still bad for business.

He ain't kidding. The camera looked like it was being held by someone with parkinsons or ADHD, it just wouldn't stay fucking STILL!

and the quick-cut editing and the over reliance on weird audio distortion effects was terrible

@Steve: I think the main issue there is that you can get away with a lot more in a book than you can in a movie. And it's not so much an issue of "this is aimed at teens" so much as "A lot of the fans are teens" and making it R-rated could damage that. On one level, yeah, it's stupid, but on the other hand I doubt that making the violence more graphic or whatnot would really make the story that much better anyway.

Also, didn't you just start following me on twitter?

edited 11th May '12 6:52:58 PM by JapaneseTeeth

Sometimes less is more when it comes to violence. Sometimes it can have more impact if it's less graphic.

edited 11th May '12 6:53:03 PM by Pannic

Chrysalis is Lauren's evil twin? Well whaddaya know.

Well it's a reasonably faithful adaptation of the books. As long as you can relax and ignore the camerawork, it's an enjoyable movie.

You can go see an R Rated movie if you are under 17 and accompanied by an adult, but most adults dont want to drag their kids with them to R rated movies.

@ginger I didn't know Michael J. Fox was in that film.

edited 11th May '12 6:54:31 PM by SkyStrike

@Pannic: Indeed; I've never been a fan of gore for gore's sake.

@JT then they could've toned down the violence of the scenes themselves.

Making the action scenes all but unwatchable due to camera shaking is NOT the way to go about dealing with your ratings problem

I am not willing to subject myself to the Transformers. Anyway, if you don't pay attention to the camera, it's a good movie.

Would I be shot if I said that having no familiarity with the canon of Transformers I think the movies were okay? (If you cut out the first half hour from the second and third movie that is.)

edited 11th May '12 6:55:52 PM by stevebat

My only problem with the film was that they diminished Rue's role. She got a lot more focus in the book.

But that's balanced out by them changing that thing with the muttations near the end which, let's face it, was kinda stupid and didn't make any sense.

I have never seen anything Transformers before the movies, and I still think they were complete crap.

The lack of an interesting characters was what sunk the movie for me though.

I thought the antagonist was the most sympathetic character and even HE was lame!

Well from what little I've seen, the Transformers has it's own issues with editing. It takes place in an alternate universe where the only colors that exist are orange and bright blue.

The first Transformers movie was ok, but the second one just had way too many continuity errors and WTF moments that it was just ... terrible.

@Ginger: Yeah, that's just stupid.

I'm in the same boat as Steve. They were hardly great cinema, but they were watchable if you're just in it to see robots fighting. Too much Shia Lebouf, though. I'm still not entirely sure what the plot was, but hey, robots.

edited 11th May '12 6:57:12 PM by JapaneseTeeth

Yeah, I liked the film as well. Although to be honest, I didn't really enjoy the second and third books that much. I like the creativity the author puts into it for the actual world, but when the love triangle gets so in your face like that, it becomes really annoying. I like romance to kind of build up slowly. And when the romance aspect overtakes the "YOU'RE IN A FREAKING ALTERNATE UNIVERSE AND THERE'S SO MUCH GOING ON!" plot, I lost my respect for the series. But the first one's good because the romance aspect is kind of hidden.

Oh, God Yes! Shia is so annoying!

edited 11th May '12 6:57:23 PM by ilsemmr