Posted on 11/30/2013 2:34:46 PM PST by LS
When I saw "The Hunger Games," I was sure there was a strong anti-government message that seemed closely related to our current situation in the USA. The newest episode in the trilogy, "Catching Fire," sharpens that message even further.
Jennifer Lawrence is headed for a position as one of those generation-defining actresses, much the way Katherine Hepburn, Raquel Welch, and Meryl Streep were. I'm not talking acting talent, although it's pretty clear Jenny can act. I'm talking about the actress who most quickly comes to mind when you talk of the early 21st century. She delivers another excellent performance as Katniss Everdeen, the reluctant rebel who must feign love for Peeta Millark (Josh Hutcherson) so that they both can survive the Hunger Games. Episode 2, "Catching Fire," picks up not long after they have become "victors" in the games and now live, relatively speaking, a life of Riley in District 12. (Not to be confused with District, 9, which is where the aliens live).
For those unfamiliar with the general story, a rebellion against the "Capital District," or "CD," has resulted in the feds crushing the "districts." Each district is defined by what it produces---food, lumber, fish, coal/gas, and so on. However, the Capital District doesn't produce anything. It leeches off all the other districts, which have been brought into subjugation. Further, to teach the districts a lesson about rebellion, every year the feds have an "entertainment" called the Hunger Games in which two candidates are "reaped" from each district---always teens to young people---and they fight to the death until there is a single victor. At the end of "Hunger Games" (episode/book 1), Katniss and Peeta find poisonous berries that they threaten to take unless both are named victors, and President Snow (whose heart is entirely black), his back against the wall, has to allow them to live for propaganda purposes. But he doesn't like it!
By episode 2, Katniss is becoming a revolutionary symbol to the oppressed people of the districts (symbolized by the Mockinjay and a hand gesture that resembles that of the Boy Scouts accompanied by a short whistle). Snow, of course, can't tolerate this kind of challenge, so he arranges through a new Games Master Plutarch (!) Heavensby (Philip Seymour Hoffman) to have a "Quarter Quell," a special once-every-25-years reaping to be fought by only victors from the districts. That leaves as the District 12 candidates Katniss and either Peeta or Haymitch (Woody Harrelson). Predictably, Peeta ends up as Jenny's death date.
What is stunning is that the messages and symbolism of the series tracks extremely well with "Atlas Shrugged." Both books were written by women, with strong heroines as the central character. Both feature rebellion against the "Man." Toward the end of "Catching Fire," Katniss finds herself on the way to her own version of "Galt's Gulch," District 13 (which supposedly had been destroyed . . . but wasn't).
But more than "Atlas Shrugged," the message of the Hunger Games Trilogy is very much the D.C./government elites (not "the rich") vs. everyone else. As Heavensby tries to convince Snow not to kill Katniss but to subject her to the games again, he uses her pending wedding to Peeta as the bait. "Show executions and floggings," he says, then show Kaniss in her wedding gown. "Show executions. Show the wedding." In other words, show the Kardashians and show the seamy side of America and get the people agitated against the elites. . . .
Except, it isn't the elites that Heavensby is setting up, and it isn't "the rich" that the people in the districts hate but rather the D.C. "Capital District" elites. The "gubment." It is clear that the only people in the CD are those who don't do anything, while all of the people in the other districts---think "flyover country"---produce everything.
Perhaps the most striking message to me was the degree to which everyone conducted their own mini-rebellions against the CD. Effie Trinket, Katniss's "handler" for the games, played by Elizabeth Banks, surreptitiously refers to Katniss, Peeta, Haymitch and herself as a team and makes them each gold, well, trinkets. Katniss's is a gold Mockingjay pin. Cinna (Lenny Kravitz), the dressmaker and stylist goes out of his way to take digs at Snow, making Katniss's "wedding gown" burn up to reveal a stunning blue Mockingjay dress. Even half of the combatants are participating in a plot to overthrow Snow and the Capital District.
Cinematically sound, "Catching Fire" has memorable and epic theme music by James Newton Howard. As a sequel, it surpasses by far Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom and ranks IMHO with "The Empire Strikes Back" and "The Two Towers."
Oh, and did I mention that the primary reading audience of this was teenagers? It is just the message they need to be hearing right now. But the theatrical audience has crossed all boundaries, and the theater was as full of adults as teenagers and young people. (Analysis of ticket buyers confirms that the movie is reaching all age and demographic groups.) So if "Atlas Shrugged" the movie hasn't caught on as well as some of us would like, there is a film out there that speaks to the dangers of big government, the romance of resistance, and the value of standing up to "the Man." And, as the graffiti in the train tunnels says, "We are always outnumbered." Big deal. Get used to it.
The dystopia of The Hunger Games will occur in ...?
Just saw the movie. Enjoyed it very much.
Ping.
Thanks DuncanW.
You’re welcome.
We liked it too. Unmistakable messaging; predominantly young folks in the audience, unusually quiet throughout.
Second, from what I've read of Collins, she is no leftie.
Third, haven't you noticed? NO ONE even knows who OWS is anymore. They went away when Zero began making the country poorer and his Wall Street buds richer (not that I have anything against Wall Street, as my retirement account has soared).
So I think anyone trying to tie this to OWS is not only obsolete and irrelevant, but badly wrong.
Well, no. As a filmmaker myself, I have a message to deliver. Now, admittedly for some people that message is just “let me entertain you with mindless stuff” for two hours-—that is what the “Jackass” movies are. But for others, no, movies (like books) are meant to be more.
This is, in fact, the "great man/great woman" theory at work---that there are millions of workerbees, but only a few Carnegies, Pattons, and so on.
Yes. Maybe she can be one of the few who keeps her mind free of leftist gibberish nonsense. A few-—Stacy Dash, Alicia Silverstone, do.
Yes, exactly-—except with Hunger Games there is a catch in that, more like Spartacus, there is a larger plot afoot among the gladiators to overthrow the (Obama) regime.
Yes, but be clear, that is the author of the BLOG, not Collins.
This, of course, is the message in "Bridge on the River Kwai," where the tension is between resisting the Japanese on the one hand and on the other showing them that "they ain't no British" when it comes to work or engineering. And what David Lean seems to have missed is that in fact there MAY HAVE BEEN a greater morale victory in actually building the bridge than in resisting the Japanese. Jesus said as much ("Overcome evil with good.") Now, I'm no Gandhi, but there may be instances where you gain a greater victory by either building something HE cannot build (the bridge) or destroying something HE cannot build ("The Fountainhead"). These are all deep metaphysical questions that I sure don't have answers to, but heck, I know enough to ask questions.
My two young teens read this series when the third came out a year or two ago, and I began reading the first because I was bored and it was sitting on the couch. Needless to say to those who read the books, I was pretty obsessed until I finished the trilogy and was blown away by the comparisons with the Regime and CD in the book—not because these people are sacrificing kids for fun, but because I was able to see the tyranny and control a government not run by and for the people is able to assert control. My kids definitely read the message the way Freepers read the message, and all of their friends read the book, too. I actually had hopes that this series could be an eye opener for their generation, and still have that hope!
I totally agree with you, Larry, but the article provides a look into the twisted thinking at work while they totally ignore the deeper point about freedom being taken by depraved despots.
If you haven’t read “Atlas Shrugged,” even though it can be a strain through some of the monologues, do so. You’ll see even more comparisons.
I guess something that just became apparent to me was the utter irrelevance of OWS in the last year. They have virtually disappeared. my college students draw a blank when I refer to OWS.
All OWS “achieved” was left behind as trash piles of placards. They were appealing to the passing fancy of any class envy they could engender but that approach is like a prairie river, a mile wide but an inch deep. The Hunger Games series appeals to deeper human desires for personal freedom, unfettered enterprise, and pursuit of that which matches our own core values.
Quote from the link I sent you: "In the special features section called “Game Maker: Suzanne Collins and the Hunger Games Phenomenon,” David Levithan, an editor for the publisher (Scholastic), tells views that “The Hunger Games” was “written in frustration of the Bush era.”"
Unless there is evidence to the contrary Collins must agree with him or she would have come out against his comments.
I don’t know if the author intended it, but in the trilogy, Katniss is not so much the warrior hero, as the pawn who survives because others see her as a useful tool, and hope to use her for their own power.
She is a hero in the small-hero sense; she is self-reliant, she cares deeply for her family, and she is not afraid. But as you said, it is Peta who saved her family. Then he saves her, along with Haymitch and the game-runner.
Then Snow tries to use her. Meanwhile, there is a real rebellion, which she knows nothing about, but when the masses see her small acts of defiance, they gain the strength to stand. So the rebellion decides to use her as well.
Throughout the book, she knows little of the plans. She spends a lot of time sidelined. She throws in little bits of important help, but needs a lot of work from others to be useful to the cause.
And into the 3rd book, we see just how much she is being used. And while the leaders fear her, they had little reason to fear her personally, she was not going to be the leader of anything, just the figurehead.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.