Hey,

Is anyone here excited for the "Hunger Games?" Who's read the book? I read the book this week and thought it was great; it's probably the first young adult book I've read since I was a young adult. Like "Avatar: The Last Airbender," I think it appeals just as much to adults as kids, if not more. I'm really curious as to what the adaptation will look like.

Never even heard of the books until now, though my sister read them all in 3 days. As for the movie, it looks somewhat interesting, but it's not exactly on the top of my list.

This is the book that wasn't a ripoff of Battle Royale according the author despite being released a decade later. In any case, BR portrayed the premise better IMO, especially as Hunger Games had the contrived plot twist that allowed the main character and her boy to survive the challenge, not to mention a more syrupy romantic angle than BR had with 2 of its main characters.

Dude, those are major spoilers. I've read Hunger Games and it's a solid read. A bit too sappy at points, but Ms. Collins has some writing ability. I have not read Battle Royale but I have seen Battle Royale and think that the Hunger Games novel is much superior to that grossly overrated film.

Ok, but at least I didn't actually reveal what the twist was.

HG was far more sappy/romantic than BR, and for me, that takes away from any impact from its exploration of the theme that both works share.

Using the word sappy to describe The Hunger Games? Really? It's a dead giveaway that you're male. Okay I don't mean that literally, but come on. This is coming from a girl who hates Twilight and knows what sappy actually is.

The Hunger Games isn't trying to do what Battle Royale did. It's about a relationship too. Sure it takes away from the impact that exploring any one theme would (whether it's the theme of romance or the theme of every-man-for-himself), but I think the juxtaposition of the two is worthy. In fact, I think the juxtaposition of the two is incredibly interesting considering that they're sort of opposites.

Hence juxtaposition, I guess.

Meh, I just think HG's overly-romantic angle just doesn't fit well within the dystopian world that it's set in. I'd bet that females would prefer HG over BR, and I guess that's the aim of the author.

The romantic angle is barely touched apon in the book, and it's more Running Man (movie) than Battle Royale. They might advertise the potential romance (there is no real romance in the first book) to get the twilight crowd to go, but it's not sappy at all. Quite violent actually.

Based on the trailer, I'd say that the romantic angle is going to be emphasized a lot more than it was in the original book. Also, I highly doubt that the film will be as violent as Battle Royale was, particularly if they go for the PG-13 rating.

Never a happy camper, are you Ragnarok?

If by "happy camper" you mean "wide-eyed naive one who thinks that films are all original and fresh", then you are absolutely correct, Raf.

I have to say, that I initially thought the twist was contrived, but Collins makes up for it when she shows the decision the couple is forced to make at the end of the first game. I should have mentioned when I started this topic that the books are obviously inspired by Battle Royal, but Collins expands on the concept. Remember that Battle Royal had a pretty treacly romance at its core as well.

Collins insists that she hadn't seen or read any version of Battle Royale before she finished (and turned in) her book. I see no reason not to believe her; it's not exactly the most original plot idea ever created and the alleged elements that she "stole" could easily have been come up with by anyone who stumbled across a similar plot in their mind. As has been mentioned, there's as many elements from The Running Man as there is from BR.



What is the theme of BR, to you?

Defending someone by saying that she could have stolen elements from other works of fiction doesn't make a whole lot of sense.


The idea of a dystopian future where the older generation views the younger with distrust. It is the ultimate old-fart fantasy: taking a bunch of "punk" schoolkids and putting them into a bloody arena to teach them to value their lives beyond their teen years and to mature more quickly. The ideas of eugenics, totalitarianism, and generational conflict are all touched upon here.

I'm not defending her, I'm just pointing out that there's very little, if anything, that should lead one to believe she stole from BR. I don't think the books are great, but I also don't think she stole from anything.

Even if you don't think the books are great, I hope you would agree that they are better written and more substantial than the "Twilight" books.

I do feel that way, but to be fair I think doctor's prescription notes are more compelling and well written than the Twilight books.

Don't you think it's a bit silly to compare a novel to a movie? That's totally an apples vs oranges thing.

The Battle Royale novel is one of the best novels I've ever read, and is much better than the movie, particularly because the novel covers the storylines for far more students than the movie does. Even if you ignored that and just compared the plots of the two, Battle Royale trumps Hunger Games bar none.

Yes, it is silly, but it was the only comparison I could make. That said, I'm in total disagreement about Battle Royale's plot being so superior to Hunger Games. What do you think makes it so much better?