Not new. There's been interviews, y'know. I find that The Hunger Games shows just how easy it is to quash any thoughts of rebellion. By blaming 13, turning the districts against each other, and eliminating children, the Capitol has a firm grip on the Districts. This is especially shown after Haymitch wins his Games. By making it seem as if the Capitol can be used to your advantage, he weakened their grip. As a result, he lost his family, deterring any attempt to do the same from his protoges, resulting in their swift death, one by one. By doing this, he ensures that he has no children to pass his intelligence on to, and forces him into a life of seclusion and self-loathing, as symbolized by his dirty and unkept house. The fact that he does not care anymore is also a sign of the Capitol's complete dominance, meaning that they can indeed, force you to believe what they do, similar to 1984. While forcing the districts to celebrate what they abhor, they are also restricting their freedom to even avoid seeing their family die. Even then, it is not enough. The Peacekeepers are not their to "keep the peace", as their name might imply. They are, in fact, there to limit the population through starvation, whipping, and simple execution, limiting the District's ability to even get a united voice across to the Capitol, rendering their dissent useless. Basically, without Katniss's inability to check herself and think about others before herself, shown by her eagerness to jump to the conclusion that Peeta worked with the Careers, the Capitol would have ruled throughout eternity. (Yes, I actually pulled that out of Books 1 and 2. I like philosophy, and figuring out how despots and tyrants think. It's like a puzzle, a very rewarding puzzle.)
yeah thats called a dictator ship and the dictator is non other than president snow a paranoid creep whos hobby is poisoning his associates
Erm...I'm talking about the idea behind it, and the fact that the dictatorship was an everlasting loop of distrust. I've written 5-page literary analyses on these types of books, I know what I'm saying. Read 1984, and you'll see what I mean. I'd rather interpret a book than just read it for fun. (I find both fun.) Read INTO the words, don't just see them. (Not intended to belittle you, just explaining what I was doing)
still Gaddafi errr i mean uh snow is crazy
also i wish the had that fog stuff on dust
He's also terminally ill. Any stress on his body is amplified, and could kill him. (Too much poison exposure) Because of this, he dies laughing a Coin, a Hunger Games version of a "dictator for the people". After "Liberating" the people from one dictator, she intends on beginning her own regime as a tyrant herself. She simply wanted control.
i guess you could say that the hunger games reflects on past human events and the sin of greed
Greed? Nah, just the idea that selfishness can be manifested in different ways. Like here:
Katniss: Thinks of her own pecking order. 50%: Katniss 25%: Peeta 15%: Family (Haymitch and Effie are included, along with Cinna. Rue to an extent.) 9%: Gale 1%: Everyone else
Peeta: Does what HE thinks is best, but it normally involves Katniss, but does not enjoy the idea that she was really up for grabs in Books 1 and 2.
Gale: Does what HE thinks is best for HIM.
Snow: Creates a Paradise for HIMSELF, turned out to be his downfall.
Coin: Well, this one explains itself.
Haymitch: Basically decided "Screw everyone else" so he won't have to face his past in his future.
Effie: Again, she lives in the Capitol, self-explaitory.
And so on, you follow?
the hunger games just make the number 13 even more unlucky btw u sound like my teacher who say that katniss just steps in it left and rite but i dont see it
also the movie will haves some new things cause if they showed every thing in the book well then just read the book man
It's true. Katniss admitted that she was selfish and was proud of it, hence the sheepish grin in Mockingjay while mentioning the fact to a Hijacked Peeta. She's really arrogant, and rarely thinks before doing things. (Such as in District 8. Got that old man killed.) She softens up as Peeta's dying, but doesn't really get out of the "It's just a ruse" mode until it's almost too late. To be honest, Snow should have had them both killed, but didn't want a martyr on his hands. (Poor Seneca Crane. Too bad he had some resemblance of a human heart. None of this should have happened, luckily Crane was afraid for his job, not his life.) Sucker.
according to the hunger games wiki peeta doesnt die
He doesn't. He should have. He loses his leg, gets stung by Tracker Jackers, and is nearly killed by Cato. What can he do? He's moderately strong, but not anything you don't see from Haymitch, he's not very stealthy, all he's got is the ability to spin a lie with ease, and his ability to hide.
how did you come across the hunger games anyway
i found the hunger games because it was so popular in my class
Found it one day. I read anything I can fit my hands on. (I'm a nerd like that.)
so whats your guys fav characters
in your opinion what is the best book for me it would be catching fire
Definitely the first.
Second was great, but it was ALL about romance. First one had a little bit of everything and had the perfect combination of it all. Third was... Well it was just kind of disappointing to me, idk why.
Why do we? I mean, picking a "favorite" diminishes the whole idea. Really, acknowledge that you have a favorite, then read Mockingjay. It won't speak to you the way it normally does. Just like the series. They all are amazing at what they do. The Hunger Games introduces the book very well, while Catching Fire holds the reader, continuing an amazing story flawlessly, purposely leaving things out. Mockingjay closes out the series, and clears up Haymitch's past, which was a big step for the series. (Man, did he get stiffed.) I see no purpose in having a favorite when you can enjoy the whole series.
this reminds me of the thunder dome its like 2 men enter and only 1 man gets out. but then its also like the battle of the sexes because there is a male and a female. this might be pretty cool like that movie bloodsport.
Erm... No. The characters were forced into the arena. They have no control. In fact, while in Bloodsport, people stood some type of chance, Districts 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, and 12 normally get owned, with the exception of Peeta, Katniss, Johanna Mason, the Morphlings, Beetee and Wiress, Finnick Odair and Haymitch. That's pretty much it for relatively recent non-Career survivors. Ten occasionally wins, but it's usually One, Two, or Four.
what i wana know is they'll make the other books or make it all 1 movei like the series of unfortunate events
Multiple movies. I wouldn't put Haymitch's Games or Johanna Mason in the first movie, would you?
well I just calls it how I see it. still its the premise of 2 oposing forces isn't it I mean like the conflict no different from the roman collesiums to the basic extent forced or not you know.
good point and if the movie was like the book the rents would not let me watch it
But is there really two opposing forces? I mean, Katniss can relate to every antagonist ever introduced. As such:
Katnniss and Snow: Both know that the romance was a lie, and also knew that it couldn't stay that way for long if Katniss wanted to live. Both are kind of selfish, and give little thought about most others.
Katniss and Cato: This one is self-explanatory. Katniss and Cato both have their own temper issues, and ahve problems with being relaxed. They tend to find themselves not checking their words.
Katniss and Coin: Coin reminds me of the Katniss from The Hunger Games, and vaguely of the Katniss from Mockingjay. They can both be selfish, and have supreme issues with someone threatening to ttake control. (As evidenced when Katniss doesn't like being "oppressed", and Coin hates the idea that the people could follow Katniss if she says the wrong thing. Thus, she'd rather have a martyr.)
The idea of opposing forces is only present in Gale and Peeta's rivalry when you look at it. They couldn't be more different. Gale is too cynical and angry.