+ Reply to Thread
+ Post New Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17

Thread: The O'Reilly Factor Laments Violence in The Hunger Games

  1. #11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sadanie View Post
    Are you kidding?

    I see the Panem government as the EXTREME end of RUN AWAY CAPITALISM, where a very few ELITE LIVE ONLY for material luxury and comfort, off the labor of an EXTREMELY poor and oppressed working/slave class.

    Yes. . .I agree with the "atheistic society" part. . .The rest is BS!
    Where was capitalism? The capitol forced the districts to furnish them with goods and services and the district people were all poor. All in misery. As is the way with socialism. They were prevented from hunting on pain of death. The bakers were not able to eat their own goods except for the inferior products.

    Where's the capitalism in that?

    The Atheism ought to be a big clue for ya.
    RIP:
    Judson "Warpig" Germany, III 12-5-10
    Kenneth 'Badnews' Simpson 3-13-12

  2. #12
    usa us vermont
    Location: Vermont (USA)
    Posts: 418
    Blog Entries: 4

    Default

    It's in the eye of the beholder. People usually just interpret things so that "the artist's views" match their own outlook. That often includes me, admittedly.

    I don't think this series is essentially about economic systems. It is about the immorality of certain conditions (like poverty and hunger), of war, of exploitation (in this case, forcing teenagers to kill each other for the entertainment of the wealthy), and such like this. The rest is all personal inference. If you think that socialism is really that exploitative and oppressive, then it is socialism. If you think capitalism is really that exploitative and oppressive (and I do), then it is capitalism.

    There are plenty of programs on TV that bear out the author's point on the directionality of society quite well. For example, I often watch The Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC. Well right after her program, there is a show called Lock-Up, which seeks to make entertainment out of the plight of actual prisoners. Or remember that program, I don't recall the name, they tried to get on TV a few years back that was to be a reality show where little children were taken away from their parents out into a deserted town to see if they could organize a functioning society without any help from adults? Remember the lawsuits? Do you kind of see what I'm getting at here?

    Well anyhow, my main criticism of the film is that, unlike the books, it doesn't involve enough, you know, hunger! The word "hunger" is even in the title! The hunger issue is one of those things that really brings home to the reader that we're not "just" talking about poverty per se, but specifically desperate poverty: the kind common in Third World countries, not the kind we see in the contemporary First World. That is one reason I choose to see a message about imperialism here as well. IMO people are still basically only thinking of themselves and their own plights here. There is a much, much poorer world outside our respective countries and this series might just be touching on that subject indirectly. Today's America is a fat, fat country, not a truly desperate and hungry one. We have troubles, but basically we are pampered and privileged compared to most of the world. Almost every single American belongs to the world's richest 10%. Pampered, privileged, and bored.
    Last edited by Polly Minx; Mar 27 2012 at 03:52 AM.

  3. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Polly Minx View Post
    It's in the eye of the beholder. People usually just interpret things so that "the artist's views" match their own outlook. That often includes me, admittedly.

    I don't think this series is essentially about economic systems. It is about the immorality of certain conditions (like poverty and hunger), of war, of exploitation (in this case, forcing teenagers to kill each other for the entertainment of the wealthy), and such like this. The rest is all personal inference. If you think that socialism is really that exploitative and oppressive, then it is socialism. If you think capitalism is really that exploitative and oppressive (and I do), then it is capitalism.

    There are plenty of programs on TV that bear out the author's point on the directionality of society quite well. For example, I often watch The Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC. Well right after her program, there is a show called Lock-Up, which seeks to make entertainment out of the plight of actual prisoners. Or remember that program, I don't recall the name, they tried to get on TV a few years back that was to be a reality show where little children were taken away from their parents out into a deserted town to see if they could organize a functioning society without any help from adults? Remember the lawsuits? Do you kind of see what I'm getting at here?

    Well anyhow, my main criticism of the film is that, unlike the books, it doesn't involve enough, you know, hunger! The word "hunger" is even in the title! The hunger issue is one of those things that really brings home to the reader that we're not "just" talking about poverty per se, but specifically desperate poverty: the kind common in Third World countries, not the kind we see in the contemporary First World. That is one reason I choose to see a message about imperialism here as well. IMO people are still basically only thinking of themselves and their own plights here. There is a much, much poorer world outside our respective countries and this series might just be touching on that subject indirectly. Today's America is a fat, fat country, not a truly desperate and hungry one. We have troubles, but basically we are pampered and privileged compared to most of the world. Almost every single American belongs to the world's richest 10%. Pampered, privileged, and bored.
    Totally agreed. I think its about our media appatites moreso than our economics. It's a commentary, and unfortunately I think it's also somewhat prophetic -- at least in that I think our reality TV shows are more about exploiting human pain as entertainment -- and thus about the stuff we'd choose to watch on TV. I think we really might see something similar, as we already are pretty darn comfortable with people experiencing emotional pain for our entertainment (as a rather extreme example, one of the real housewives' husbands committed suicide after the end of a season) and further, our stunt-based reality TV is going in a rather extreme direction as well. We aren't even uncomfortable with showing re-enacted deaths on TV (1000_Ways_to_Die) so I'm not having a hard time imagining something like Hunger Games happening in America. We're like 3/4 there.

    That's what I got from it -- we're so used to exploiting the pain of other people that we're losing sight of the fact that they are real people.

  4. #14

    Default

    What this movie is trying to do, has been done much better in films like Battle Royale or The Running Man. These movies better encapsulated the absurd yet almost precient views on the exploitation of people for the sake of entertainment, a practice harkening back to the Roman Coliseum.

    If this movie is a gateway for young people to find movies like that, then I welcome films like this. I haven't see THG so I am unaware of how 'satirical' it is, or if it really tries to be a 'serius filmz', but I really hope its more the latter then the former.
    "They all have husbands and wives and children and houses and dogs, and, you know, they've all made themselves a part of something and they can talk about what they do. What am I gonna say? "I killed the president of Paraguay with a fork. How've you been?" Martin Grosse

    Forum Rules

  5. #15

    Default

    I'd give the book an M rating and probably the same for the movie, even though I haven't seen it yet. Can't wait to, though.
    Farewell my beautiful Gracie Baby, beloved pet:
    15th Jan 1997- 18 Jul 2009

    "The Futures Not Set; There Is No Fate But What We Make For Ourselves" - John Connor: Terminator 2.
    http://mywinterstorm83.livejournal.com/

  6. #16
    usa us vermont
    Location: Vermont (USA)
    Posts: 418
    Blog Entries: 4

    Default

    Cubed wrote:
    What this movie is trying to do, has been done much better in films like Battle Royale or The Running Man. ...

    ...I haven't see[n] THG...
    If you haven't seen it, how do you know it's inferior to other films of somewhat comparable themes?

    The Hunger Games is at least three times more compelling than The Running Man, IMO.

  7. #17

    Default

    Actually I wouldn't be surprised by that. The Running man isn't a very 'good' or compelling movie at all. It (and Battle Royale) both took the theme to an over the top extreme. All the reviews and previews and even the trailer conveyed a more serious tone. I'm not judging the films quality itself, as yes, I have not seen it. What I was speaking more to was the serious vrs absurd views on a futuristic setting that has reached the point of violence-as-entertainment.
    I'm very curious to see it though, based on everything I've heard.
    "They all have husbands and wives and children and houses and dogs, and, you know, they've all made themselves a part of something and they can talk about what they do. What am I gonna say? "I killed the president of Paraguay with a fork. How've you been?" Martin Grosse

    Forum Rules

+ Reply to Thread
+ Post New Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. The Hunger Games
    By Makedde in forum Other Off-Topic Chat
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: Aug 29 2012, 09:29 PM
  2. "The Hunger Games", who's ready?
    By Tribearer_Eko in forum Media & Commentators
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: Feb 22 2012, 11:08 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks