|
Post by bloodblack on Oct 1, 2012 9:17:43 GMT -5
Firstly, I have only seen the British cut which was butchered by the BBFC^h^h^h^hstudio. Secondly, I have not read the novel.
The breaking point for me was the break-out point of the fight. Within ninety seconds (of screen time) (or something like that) the scoreboard-in-the-sky announced that there were only thirteen (of 24?) combatants left. And we had not been shown one single kill.
As to Harry Potter having six or seven films - well, Katniss had sixty or seventy minutes where nothing was happening. Extraordinarily poor exposition.
|
|
|
Post by xtrialbyfirex on Oct 1, 2012 17:10:07 GMT -5
All that boring character development! pshaw!
But really, if you didn't like the movie, then that is a perfectly fine opinion.
However, the comparison to Harry Potter was in regard to the depth of the two respective characters, and had absolutely nothing to do with the the pacing or excitement of the movie.
If you like Harry Potter better then that would make a lot of sense. I would also gladly take 8 Harry Potter movies over 1 Hunger Games movie any day.
|
|