Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

To all the butt-hurt Battle Royale nerds, the author had neven even heard of Battle Royale when she wrote the books.

rubiksnoob wrote:To all the butt-hurt Battle Royale nerds, the author had neven even heard of Battle Royale when she wrote the books.

I'm not sure 'but-hurt...nerds' is an appropriate rejoinder, as if you weren't a little bit of a nerd yourself wouldn't be on a dedicated Warhammer site, and you wouldn't be using a word like butt-hurt to describe people if you weren't first a little butt-hurt yourself.

As to the statement, I have no reason to believe her any more then I have reason to trust her. I don't really care if she took inspiration from it or not becuase using other sources for inspiration is a big part of any art so even if she did it isn't like she wouldn't be in good company.

Grakmar wrote:
The first book was pretty good. It stared a strong, intelligent young woman who was willing to fight to save her loved ones.

Or herself, really. Whether she saved Peter out of feelings for him or just knew she would never be accepted in her own community was much more up in the air than in the movie.

The second book started to go downhill. It stared a strong young woman who was willing to fight to save her loved ones, but she was suddenly an idiot for no reason. It started off strong, and the ending was pretty good. But, the middle half of the book was all just filler. You kept waiting for something to happen, but she was too dumb to actually take part in any of the exciting things happening around her.

Spoiler:

I mean, she had people come up to her and explicitly say "There's a revolution forming around you." Yet, she seemed totally oblivious to it.

The third book was rather disappointing. It stared a dumb, weak, sappy young girl. She sits around and does nothing for almost the entire book. Occasionally, something exciting will happen for a brief moment, but then she gets all sad again and nothing happens for another 3 or 4 chapters.

Spoiler:

And, her final mission was idiotic. Were we suppose to actually cheer her on as she disobeyed orders, rushed into a warzone with no preparation, got everyone around her killed, and accomplished absolutely nothing?

I don't think you're doing the third book justice, or the new direction it went with. I'll definitely agree with you about the final mission though, I'm not sure what was up with that.

The ending was pretty good though.

I think the main problem (at least what I experienced) is two fold:

My GF is currently reading the books (i'm waiting for her to start book 2 so I can read book 1) and she said the movie has trimmed so much out of the books that continuity errors are rife.

The second problem is that people (as was I) go into the movie expecting some uber-perfect lovechild of 1984, Battle Royale and Gladiator. If you keep that mindset you will not enjoy the film, once you see the film for what it is, i.e. a bunch of teenagers killing each other in a futuristic dystopian forest, you enjoy it much much more.

Leigen_Zero wrote:I think the main problem (at least what I experienced) is two fold:

My GF is currently reading the books (i'm waiting for her to start book 2 so I can read book 1) and she said the movie has trimmed so much out of the books that continuity errors are rife.

The second problem is that people (as was I) go into the movie expecting some uber-perfect lovechild of 1984, Battle Royale and Gladiator. If you keep that mindset you will not enjoy the film, once you see the film for what it is, i.e. a bunch of teenagers killing each other in a futuristic dystopian forest, you enjoy it much much more.

I highly doubt that. I don't think the target audience of teenage wimminz knows or gives a gak about 1984, Battle Royale or Gladiator.

What Frazzled said. We're getting to the point where I actually have to explain Gladiator to people! And no one knew about Battle Royale to start with and 1984 is a title everyone knows exists but almost no one has ever read.

Or better yet, they read it and don't understand. I read Animal Farm for the first time in 8th grade and know one else in the class understood it...they were like "Talking animals, wtf is the point?"

/facepalm

Amaya is NOT ENTERTAINED!

1984 was the one where Kurt Russel had to save the Presidents daughter from Timothy Van Patten's gang, Big Brother, becuase she witnessed them killing Michael J. Fox, if I recall correctly.

LordofHats wrote:What Frazzled said. We're getting to the point where I actually have to explain Gladiator to people! And no one knew about Battle Royale to start with and 1984 is a title everyone knows exists but almost no one has ever read.

It's a pretty popular book. Granted it's probably not popular amongst the intended audience of 'The hunger games' or even battle royale for that matter.

Frazzled wrote:

Leigen_Zero wrote:I think the main problem (at least what I experienced) is two fold:

My GF is currently reading the books (i'm waiting for her to start book 2 so I can read book 1) and she said the movie has trimmed so much out of the books that continuity errors are rife.

The second problem is that people (as was I) go into the movie expecting some uber-perfect lovechild of 1984, Battle Royale and Gladiator. If you keep that mindset you will not enjoy the film, once you see the film for what it is, i.e. a bunch of teenagers killing each other in a futuristic dystopian forest, you enjoy it much much more.

I highly doubt that. I don't think the target audience of teenage wimminz knows or gives a gak about 1984, Battle Royale or Gladiator.

I apologise, when I say 'people' I mean 'people who have a broader knowledge of literature than Sparkly Vampires and Mary-Sue Boy Wizards', which is probably more akin to 'people who are not the target market of the film, but went to see it anyway'. From my perspective, most critics of the film seem to lie outside the target market, because they expect this poignant political message to rise to the surface and envelope us all in it's deep meaningful goodness, but it doesn't...

However, sit there and think 'teens killing each other with medieval weapons! cool!' and you will enjoy it much more. Kind of like how the transformers remakes are crap if you expect to see more than robots that transform into vehicles blow stuff up...

Leigen_Zero wrote: if you expect to see more than robots that transform into vehicles blow stuff up...

How about if I expect it to be done well? It would be nice if they did that for a change

Leigen_Zero wrote:

Frazzled wrote:

Leigen_Zero wrote:I think the main problem (at least what I experienced) is two fold:

My GF is currently reading the books (i'm waiting for her to start book 2 so I can read book 1) and she said the movie has trimmed so much out of the books that continuity errors are rife.

The second problem is that people (as was I) go into the movie expecting some uber-perfect lovechild of 1984, Battle Royale and Gladiator. If you keep that mindset you will not enjoy the film, once you see the film for what it is, i.e. a bunch of teenagers killing each other in a futuristic dystopian forest, you enjoy it much much more.

I highly doubt that. I don't think the target audience of teenage wimminz knows or gives a gak about 1984, Battle Royale or Gladiator.

I apologise, when I say 'people' I mean 'people who have a broader knowledge of literature than Sparkly Vampires and Mary-Sue Boy Wizards', which is probably more akin to 'people who are not the target market of the film, but went to see it anyway'. From my perspective, most critics of the film seem to lie outside the target market, because they expect this poignant political message to rise to the surface and envelope us all in it's deep meaningful goodness, but it doesn't...

However, sit there and think 'teens killing each other with medieval weapons! cool!' and you will enjoy it much more. Kind of like how the transformers remakes are crap if you expect to see more than robots that transform into vehicles blow stuff up...

You presume much. My daughter read the Hobbit when she was 7 and is a fantasy freak. Her friends are off the charts of the scholastic stuff. None of them give a gak about sparkly vampires 1984, Battle Royale, or Gladiator.

Get off your high horse. I'm sure you were reading Machiavelli and Tolstoy when you were three, or just being an elitist snob with a chip on their shoulder, about...popcorn movies...

Frazzled wrote:
Get off your high horse. I'm sure you were reading Machiavelli and Tolstoy when you were three, or just being an elitist snob with a chip on their shoulder, about...popcorn movies...

I do apologise if I sounded snobbish or elitist, I was trying to convey that those expecting 'more' from the film than a bunch of teens killing each other would be left feeling a bit disappointed.

All I'm saying is if you go into the movie expecting a deep and meaningful message (as I was expecting when I walked into the cinema) then the movie isn't as enjoyable. As soon as you forget the idea of a poignant message hidden in the context, and enjoy the movie for a bunch of teens killing each other, then the movie becomes much more enjoyable.

Leigen_Zero wrote:

Frazzled wrote:
Get off your high horse. I'm sure you were reading Machiavelli and Tolstoy when you were three, or just being an elitist snob with a chip on their shoulder, about...popcorn movies...

I do apologise if I sounded snobbish or elitist, I was trying to convey that those expecting 'more' from the film than a bunch of teens killing each other would be left feeling a bit disappointed.

All I'm saying is if you go into the movie expecting a deep and meaningful message (as I was expecting when I walked into the cinema) then the movie isn't as enjoyable. As soon as you forget the idea of a poignant message hidden in the context, and enjoy the movie for a bunch of teens killing each other, then the movie becomes much more enjoyable.

Well there you go. Teens killing each other. Sounds like a plan.

I hated it, the book and movie, all me mates took me to the movies and said it would be awesome...

It wasen't.

Poppa Bear /hugs

Jaysus, the Battle Royale thing had to creep in somewhere didnt it

I just sat through the whole thing pretending I was watching a civilized world in the Imperium screen conscripts for potential Imperial Guard recruits. I dunno why, but the world shown in the movie reminded me heavily of what the Imperium was like. Except a bit more nice.

TheCustomLime wrote:I just sat through the whole thing pretending I was watching a civilized world in the Imperium screen conscripts for potential Imperial Guard recruits. I dunno why, but the world shown in the movie reminded me heavily of what the Imperium was like. Except a bit more nice.

So does that mean the chick gets to become a Space Marine?

Sister of Battle.

The Schola Progenium sure has changed these past couple of years.

Eh, the hunger games is just an admittance test. And a pretty entertaining one at that.