They enjoy watching kids killing other kids for entertainment. These people are The Worst.
Oh, come on, bon. They give them really fancy hotel rooms and excellent food first!
Oz ,'Storyteller'
A place to talk about movies--old and new, good and bad, high art and high cheese. It's the place to place your kittens on the award winners, gossip about upcoming fims and discuss DVD releases and extras. Spoiler policy: White font all plot-related discussion until a movie's been in wide release two weeks, and keep the major HSQ in white font until two weeks after the video/DVD release.
They enjoy watching kids killing other kids for entertainment. These people are The Worst.
Oh, come on, bon. They give them really fancy hotel rooms and excellent food first!
Some of them even get DESSERT!
I'm with javachik and le n. That bothered me more than the pin, for real.
Although I agree with ita that the book was somewhat unclear on whether they really were...
No, it's pretty clear. Besides the physical resemblance, each of those muttations has a collar with its district number on it. I just went to doublecheck, but I gave Nora her copy back.
That's not proof that they're actually made from the tributes, though. I assumed that was part of the fucked-up psychological torture. Mostly because at that point in the series, the level of technology to turn dead kids into monsters seemed absurd. But there are some fucked-up muttations in later books, so I don't know.
P-C,
but see after finishing the 3rd book, the idea was cemented for me.
the author seemed to want us to know that they were capable of all kinds of genetic mutations for attractiveness and war. They jacked up the yellowjackets after all. Their power is strong.
the origin of the pin doesn't become apparent until book two. so after re-reading it, i am a little perturbed at that change even though i still get why they didn't introduce another character. they could've had Prim give it to her when they were saying goodbye and tell her who it was from. *shrug*
Hey you guys, sorry if this was already brought up (I do most of my reading of teh interwebs on iPhone and so miss a lot of whitefont. But I just read on another site (that compiled the diffs between movie and book) something about Peeta losing his leg in the book? Does that happen? Yikes! It has been too long since I read the books and can barely remember. But certainly that is a huge difference than a healthy Peeta at the end?
We need a bigger hint to this brutality or the full weight of the other books will be lost IMO
I don't know if the movies need the full weight of the books to be really really heavy, honestly. It's not like the first movie painted the Capitol in any remotely positive light if you haven't read the books. They're already horribly exploitative monsters. At some point it risks becoming an enumeration of nasty ideas, and not events with distinct impact.
Just to be clear, we are allowed to have our own opinions here, right?
I'm assuming I get to have one too, right?
they could've had Prim give it to her when they were saying goodbye and tell her who it was from. *shrug*
That would have worked beautifully, because it wouldn't have been any additional screen time and would set up the meaning for the next movies very well.
Re. genetic mutations: You wouldn't need to use the physical body of the dead tributes to create the mutts. All you need is their genes, which probably could be extracted from blood sample and modified and used to create the hybrids. I assume they'd have banked samples of blood / tissue from the tributes pre-game.
In the movie, my guess is that they did not go with the mutts wearing the faces of the dead tributes because it would have been v. hard to get a good enough CGI that would make that look suitably horrific, instead of super-cheesy.