This review makes a good point. Why are the MPAA able to lower the rating of a movie about children killing children, just because they remove the "sting" and gloss over the obvious issues this subject brings up. Clearly its done just to reach a wider audience and earn some more box office money, maybe it shouldn't be allowed?
They should've forced them to make it Rated R and hopefully force the director to think about at least broaching the subject to the audience. It's for this reason that, sadly you realize why this will just be another "hollywood blockbuster" movie nobody remembered and not a potential classic like the original, Battle Royale, became.
It's not meant to be a "Rated-R" book. I thought it was handled well, because although it IS a violent book, it's paradoxically an anti-violence message. It doesn't need to be gory and bloody to make a point, just like, for example, it doesn't have to be porn to suggest that there's a relationship between two people.
I think it SHOULD include teenagers, because they're an audience who needs a message like this - a chance to see their own "Capitol" culture from the outside, if only for a brief glimpse and Rated-R, at least to some extent, prevents that.
I havnt see or read an of the books,but this seems like a odd series.
Do the kids kill each other in the Competition or what? Because that seems deep if they show that.
It IS deep, and reducing it to "Twilight 2.0" robs The Hunger Games of some of their most important themes.
I would characterize the most significant message as being the one that points back to our own decadent culture and say that the trilogy is deeper than many would suggest. It's a good read, seemingly simplistic writing at first, but on purpose because of the point of view (1st-person as a 16-year-old girl), rather than the simplicity of the author herself. It's not just another Twilight, and I'm not just saying that to defend my manhood - it made me think, which is more than I can say about a lot of the drivel that's out there.