To quote Freud: "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."

Don't teenagers always live in dystopia? No matter what your parents do, smother you, give you too much freedom, eventually you hate it. It's part of being a teenager. I think the adolescent story, if told with adolescent naivety, is open to multiple interpretations. The world gains nuance as you get older, than the world crystalizes again as you reach old age. But the teen years are before you've encountered all of that, so when you read those stories as an adult, you're able to interpret it wherever you are in your life. I'd argue that even Romeo and Juliet (and its inspiration, Pyramus and Thisbe) is set in a dystopia. The world is broken. And you can read it one of two ways. The kids are just too rash and should have listened to their elders, summed up by the Friar's admonition "Love moderately." Or the adults are to blame for the world they created, summed up by the Prince's line, "All are punish'd". But all the characters are true to themselves, child and adult both. The important thing is to be true to your characters. If you write a story about teenagers, you have to take teenagers seriously, even if you think teenagers are stupid. Remember that all teenagers think what's going in their lives is the MOST IMPORTANT THING EVER, even if it's just figuring out what phone to get.

I noticed the film took in -25% or thereabouts from Saturday compared to Friday, then again Sunday from Saturday. There could be any number of reasons for this, but it doesn't look good. How often does one say that upon a $155m opening?

Certainly. It twists George Orwell's Big Brother by making ourselves as the authoritarian identity. We, as the shallow voyeurs (look at the funky gaudy clothes, hairstyles, etc), that take any type of entertainment (the Games) at any price (death, in an arena with gladiators, just like in Ancient Rome). You've got the dictatorship of the lobby and advertisement (the sponsors mean survival), you've got those boys and girls living a nightmare in a world that is as much as a reality TV show as a perverse video game controlled by us. It is absolutely political, underneath. It is just in the form of a young adult narrative. If done by Kubrick, it would have a more anthropological approach. If done by Nolan, it would be dark. I think Gary Ross did an amazing job and this is a great film.

I saw it last night and I didn't like it. I didn't hate it, but I didn't think it was good or anything. (the review on slashfilm sums up my thoughts perfectly). That said, I'm really curious as to why this series is such a hit? The movie is a hit because the books are a hit. Same goes for Twilight/Harry Potter (tho not Percy Jackson). I'll give it this: fantastic idea/premise. It's different (different enough) from what we've seen in the past. Talk about high-concept that is appealing to a broad audience. Is it possible that the concept itself can supply a whole series? Maybe because I haven't read the books and I've only seen the movie but I thought that it was very light on theme. The social commentary (kids killing kids/oppressive govt/etc.) was fairly light. It was more about following Katniss and her will to survive. It didn't seem much deeper than that but the commentary/analysis makes it out to be much more profound. To me, the social commentary was either too subtle or nonexistent. What kind of creed/manifesto are they getting out of it? I'm not saying this to hate on it, but when compared to 1984 or A Brave New world, I really don't see this series standing up to it. Even a movie as bad as The Condemned seemed to have more social commentary going on about it. So I'm genuinely curious, why is the series so loved? Is it that entertaining? Or is it that profound and I just missed it? I like seeing it break box office numbers tho, it's always inspiring no matter what the movie.

Amen. I have a teenage daughter, so read the books and took her to the movie. I've heard many people say this story is a lot like "Battle Royale" by Takami. To quote Shakespeare: "Much Ado about Nothing."

I found The Hunger Games to be a surprisingly deep movie about the very best and the very worst of human nature. Having never read the book I walked in blind about the story other than what has been buzzed about in the news. What you find is a world of the haves and the have nots. The haves enjoy all the luxuries one could need to satisfy the shallowest of cravings - gaudy clothing, gourmet food, the lifestyle of the spoiled and famous - but nowhere in the world of the haves is there a source of inspiration, love, timeless beauty or hope - that is kept out of reach by their rulers - especially hope. Consider the juxtaposition - the Haves love themselves deeply. The Have Nots love each other. The Haves tune into and watch a state sponsored match of children brutally murdering each other. The love that emerges between the fellow Have Nots nearly undoes the entire spell cast on the Haves by their media rulers. Hunger Games an impressive political statement made by a writer who clearly has been paying attention to the awesome power of the media and how it makes the heart cold and the mind dull. Wether you agree or not, it's making a strong point about how as a culture we treat our kids today. The most amazing thing about this movie is that the Hunger Games themselves exist as a reminder of a time when brother fought brother and ruined the nation. The irony is that when brother fights brother the only winner is the collective Big Brother. You should run to see this movie. It's profound. Divide the Government not the People.

Here is my new article comparing "The Hunger Games" to the Obama Administration and a totalitarian society. http://www.hollywoodrepublican.net/2012/03/hunger-games-a-lesson-in-totalitarianism/