patching...
Welcome back, Patch Blogger!

On a Scale of 1-10, How Good Was 'The Hunger Games'?

OK, you went to the midnight showing. You've had a chance to sleep in. How was it?

 

Did you go to the midnight community movie outing showing of The Hunger Games?

How was it?

We're looking for a little local reaction. 

The Daily Herald's Dann Gire calls it "a mildly sexless, blunted action thriller featuring cheesy digital flame effects and a superbly sympathetic, highly physical performance by Jennifer Lawrence as a female John Rambo."

Ouch. (But he still gave it three stars.)

The Tribune's Michael Phillips also gives it three stars, calling it "pretty gripping."

Roger Ebert gives it three stars and calls it "effective entertainment," but he adds that he found the movie too long and deliberate.

What do you think?

  • On a Scale of 1-10, How good was "Hunger Games"?

    (Voting has been closed for this question)
    • 10 — Tell us why in the comments field!
        9 (26%)
    • 9 — Tell us why in the comments field!
        5 (14%)
    • 8 — Tell us why in the comments field!
        10 (29%)
    • 7 — Tell us why in the comments field!
        3 (8%)
    • 6 — Tell us why in the comments field!
        3 (8%)
    • 5 — Tell us why in the comments field!
        0 (0%)
    • 4 — Tell us why in the comments field!
        2 (5%)
    • 3 — Tell us why in the comments field!
        0 (0%)
    • 2 — Tell us why in the comments field!
        1 (2%)
    • 1 — Tell us why in the comments field!
        1 (2%)
    Total votes: 34
  • Your vote will only count once. This is not a scientific poll. View Results Vote!
Related Topics: Chicago area reviews and The Hunger Games

Katrina Wade

8:23 am on Saturday, March 24, 2012

Acting was bland. No chemistry between the stars. A disappointment.

Reply

Brian Smith

12:04 pm on Saturday, March 24, 2012

Whatever you may or may not like about the HGs, it will hold your attention for 2 hours from start to finish. In trying to discover the main message of the story I came away with this: While the proletariat (underclass) may be considered nothing more than entertainment for the ruling class, our hero shows that the underclass can outwit, overcome, and eventually overthrow the heartless ruling class. It is Braveheart for millenials.

Reply
Comment_arrow

Jim Court

9:45 pm on Wednesday, March 28, 2012

Brian,

You could be a very good movie critique !

Lori M

5:45 pm on Saturday, March 24, 2012

If you read the books there wasnt suppose to be chemistry.. Yet... It was exactly how I pictured it when I read the book.. Awkward...

Reply

Roxanne weasley

5:59 pm on Saturday, March 24, 2012

Loved the acting katniss didn't like peeta till the 2nd book so the producers knew what they were doing I'm going to see the movie a secound time I would give the movie 7/10 stars

Reply

Julia

2:54 pm on Sunday, March 25, 2012

It was absolutely perfect!! They followed the book exactly!!! It was exactly how I pictured it in my head

Reply

Janet Dabetic

3:45 pm on Sunday, March 25, 2012

I thought the set design was perfect and it followed the book very well. Jennifer Lawrence's performance was right on. However the characters were not examined, there was no chemistry, and if you didn't read the book I think you would be disappointed.

Reply

Gwen Carr

9:32 pm on Sunday, March 25, 2012

I thoroughly enjoyed the film, and found it very true to the book which I finished the day before. My husband and son who did not read the book also found it very entertaining and it made for interesting discussion. There is depth and symbolism if you want to go there. I felt the pacing was very good. A negative was the out of focus camera work, I understood why they used it but did not enjoy it or think it added to the film.

Reply

Leave a comment