Hunger Games

Just read the first book, since it showed up available on my kindle and it was laughably easy to buy.

It wasn’t terrible. Mildly curious to see the movie now.

I know that’s not a review worthy of Edpool, but oh well.

About Hatboy

I’m not often driven to introspection or reflection, but the question does come up sometimes. The big question. So big, there’s just no containing it within the puny boundaries of a single set of punctuationary bookends. Who are these mysterious and unsung heroes of obscurity and shadow? What is their origin story? Do they have a prequel trilogy? What are their secret identities? What are their public identities, for that matter? What are their powers? Their abilities? Their haunted pasts and troubled futures? Their modus operandi? Where do they live anyway, and when? What do they do for a living? Do they really have these fantastical adventures, or is it a dazzlingly intellectual and overwrought metaphor? Or is it perhaps a smug and post-modern sort of metaphor? Is it a plain stupid metaphor, hedged around with thick wads of plausible deniability, a soap bubble of illusory plot dependent upon readers who don’t dare question it for fear of looking foolish? A flight of fancy, having dozed off in front of the television during an episode of something suitably spaceship-oriented? Do they have a quest, a handler, a mission statement, a department-level development objective in five stages? I am Hatboy.
This entry was posted in Edpool and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

13 Responses to Hunger Games

  1. brknwntr says:

    I have the same opinion of The Hunger Games as I do of Twilight. They are good books, FOR THEIR TARGET AGE GROUP. They are moderately well written, the plot flows mostly without harsh random jumps or unexplainable twists, To an adult mind, the issues and conflicts can seem laughable or overly simplistic, but they are pretty well suited for the 10-16 crowd. I’ve enjoyed both series as a light read, and regret nothing.

    • stchucky says:

      Yeah, I wasn’t exactly horrified by the violence in it, seeing as how most of the science fiction and fantasy I read as a pre-teen was at least as bad.

      And it was well-enough written to make me want to pay €8 for the next book to see what happens next. That’s twice as much as I have ever paid for an e-book before.

    • aaronthepatriot says:

      Yup, you nailed it. Although I have a hard time believing even a 16 year old girl is THAT dumb in her head about boys. But I’m out of my depths on that one. Just a feeling. I certainly hated the indecision, LOL.

      • stchucky says:

        Although I have a hard time believing even a 16 year old girl is THAT dumb in her head about boys. But I’m out of my depths on that one. Just a feeling. I certainly hated the indecision, LOL.

        Also true. I remember thinking that it should bug me more, as I was reading The Hunger Games. But for some reason it didn’t, probably because I was getting the helpless bind she was in. It seemed like another extension of her protective instinct and the way she had supplied food for her family. She volunteered for the same reason, out of desperation, and then the two-winners, play-lovebirds thing was a solution she had to pursue for survival’s sake. It kind of worked, and the dumb-headness you mention at least worked to avoid too much agonising about Gale, that I would have found annoying.

        Now, though, I’m 1/3 through Catching Fire (it’s fast reading, I’ll give it that) and the wishy-washy hand-wringing and wondering what to do is really starting to piss me off. She’s only just decided to start an uprising? Seems to me the time to do that was when you had President Snow in your fucking lounge room, idiot.

      • aaronthepatriot says:

        Exactly! I’m so glad I am not alone in my “unfair” issues with being in her head. While you and I share an inclination to being judgmental, imma go ahead and trust in your other inclination to resist the first inclination and say we’re being pretty fair and patient here, and this aspect of the books was a bit ridiculous.

        But to the first point you rebutted, I just found the concept of not being sure which guy you had a crush on (ok, loved?) a bit strange. Falling for two guys at once is SO twi-hard.

      • stchucky says:

        I was under the impression that she was definitely in love with Gale, but just didn’t know (due to an emotionally stunted upbringing and a lot of repression) she was “supposed” to call it that. Plus, she was probably denying it because he was older and she thought he thought they were just hunting buddies, so she turned it into a big brother relationship as a means of defending herself. Although I admit I just wrote “she thought he thought”, so will not attempt to deny the twi-hardity of it.

        As for Peeta, I thought her reaction to him was one of helpless obligation, because he’d saved them from starvation. She may have recognised that his act was one of an admirer, but again – emotionally stunted. Furthermore, she didn’t think of him that way because she was holding out for Gale, so the basic dynamic was one of “nice guy” with crush who doesn’t know he exists, until fortune throws her right in his lap.

        I wouldn’t be at all surprised if the whole 74th Hunger Games was orchestrated by Peeta (the boy whose peenie was on fire) so he could get into Katniss’s pants.

      • aaronthepatriot says:

        Well it’s been a while for me, so I’m going to say you are probably right. Peenie on fire, LMAO! Especially once the movie role was cast for Katniss! Can’t blame Peeta or his peen!

        You being right again is only slightly ruined by this “Don’t 17-year-olds have their shit together?” which I must assume is facetious!

      • stchucky says:

        So not ruined at all then, since it was absolutely facetious?

      • aaronthepatriot says:

        “So not ruined at all then, since it was absolutely facetious?”

        Quite so! I was being sarcastic. I think. Or was that also facetious? Hey, I got it right once, I get one pass to get it wrong!

      • stchucky says:

        Let’s say it was irony, and wait for somebody to argue the point. C’mon, it’ll be fun.

      • aaronthepatriot says:

        It’ll be awesome. Everyone can bring their own personal definition of irony, and at the end we’ll all be gnawing on our keyboards. Which will be ironic, I’m sure, just like the guy who was afraid to fly and when his plane crashed down, he thought “well isn’t this nice.”

      • stchucky says:

        Anyway, long story short, I thought it was done pretty well with the pressures she was under … but by book 2 she definitely needed to have sorted her shit out. Come on, she’s almost 17. Don’t 17-year-olds have their shit together?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s