Follow TV Tropes

Following

History Headscratchers / TheHungerGames

Go To

OR

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None



to:

*** That bugged me too. One possible explanation is that she was trying to throw off Coin so to make [[spoiler: the assassination]] easier; the other is that she was just batshit ''nuts'' at that point. The InsanityDefense wasn't exactly made up, here.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None



to:

** I have one IJBM for the whole series, and it's in ''Mockingjay'': [[spoiler:Oh, Katniss, ''why'' did you vote for the Capitol kids to go into their own Hunger Games? Even if it didn't happen... ''why''?!]] It really bugs me that Collins had Katniss do that. It was pointless and contradicts most of what Katniss said about the Games in the past books.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

*** Actually, possible Fridge Brilliance moment. A major theme of the book is (obviously) how sick it is to enjoy watching the enforced murder and torture (psychological and physical) of children. For the first two books (which were both very moving, and pretty graphic, but in my opinion less negative than Mockingjay) that's exactly what happens. Just like at the capital. We've got our favourite tributes, and and at best feel bad for, at worst couldn't give a rats ass for the rest. The reader can't help but marvel at the Hunger Games, even as they're disgusted. The third book shows us that not everything will work out. It's supposed to be real life, not just a show in TV. In other words, we've become the fans of the Hunger Games from the Capitol, and Mockingjay is bringing us back to the reality of the horror and brutality. Wow...
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None



to:

**This troper actually thought the body count was surprisingly low. Only Three or so major characters die? That's tiny. Other than that- it's a war story. The moment something becomes a war story, it becomes "anyone can die."
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

** They don't want them to last 'as along as possible', just not be over too quickly and the rush for supplies with the ensuing bloodbath is a 'kick-off' event to get the crowds cheering and engrossed in the Hunger Games.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None



to:

** It 'regurgitates' none of the Battle Royale plot but instead shares the basic concept, i.e. young adult death matches. The rest couldn't be more differnt while working around that same element.

Added: 1146

Removed: 2832

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** She's a sue? Really? I know people have already addressed this, but I'm going to say it anyway. No. She's probably the furthest from a Mary-Sue you can get. Yes, she kicks ass and is more BadAss than most of the leading men combined. She's also manipulative, distrusting, cantankerous, impulsive, unkind, unsympathetic towards others, ruthless, unfriendly, violent, and in general a pretty hard person to like in-universe. She has only two love interests, probably the only ones she's ''ever'' had, and both have grown up with her and do have reasons to be attracted. (Peeta is attracted by her spirit and OppositesAttract, while Gale is attracted because [[BirdsOfAFeather they're so much alike and they're so close]].) All of her skills have plausible reasons behind them (in fact, not having a couple of them would be cause for a few raised eyebrows), and not only that, but they [[LawOfConservationOfDetail have a real reason to be in the book.]] A character with believable flaws who other characters don't ''have'' to like or be kind to to be considered a hero (Johanna, for one, and kinda-sorta-not-really Coin) is definitely not a sue.




* Oh. My. Word. This troper has been stunned by the complete and utter lack of research on anything and everything to do with weapons and combat. Considering the entire series is based on a premise of combat, that's hard to swallow.
** Some examples include arrow "sheaths", bows and arrows that are, if their description is to be believed, made of silver or gold, arrows packed with so much explosive they can blow the tail off a bomber plane, and bows that are mostly devoid of outward enhancements but allow the user to shoot accurately at a distance of over 100 meters.
*** Although in defence of technical enhancements of the arrows: It ''is'' the future after all, and if the Capitol can find a way to create genetically enhanced supercreatures, the technology probably exists to make an arrow appear to be silver or gold, or carry enough junk in the trunk to do some decent incendiary damage. If we're going to argue about the technology behind the weapons, let's start with the fact that Finnick's trident in the third book will return to him on command...
**** Future or not, too many of those things (Finnick's trident included) break the laws of physics and are just not possible.
*** In relation to that, Katniss is apparently a fugitive Tolkien elf related to Legolas, if her shooting ability is to be believed. She always shoots her kills in the eye--even though they're usually rabbits and squirrels. This troper is baffled as to how and why she picked up this skill when she was supposed to be hunting to assuage her family's desperate need for food. Or why anyone would ask her if she had ever shot a hummingbird with an arrow in the extremely not-hummingbird-friendly climate of Panem.
** The author also appears to think that traditional bows and crossbows are the same thing. Though Katniss strings her bow at one point, she also "loads" it. There's some mention of a "notch" but never a "nock" and one character even shoulders one of the more technologically advanced models--before aiming it around the room and sighting through the scope. But there is otherwise no evidence that Katness or said character knows how to handle a crossbow.
*** It's never implicitly stated that Gale's bow is a crossbow, which makes the scope and bells and whistles make even less sense. Even if it is a crossbow, there's a catch-22 wherein he can cast and load in time with Katniss and her recurve.
**** Pardon. This troper meant to point out that the actions Gale takes with the bow sound like a crossbow is being referred to, adding to the impression that the author doesn't understand the difference.
** The author also seems to think that a big guy wielding a great big sword always has the advantage--even over a smart, swift bit of nothing that can hop from tree to tree like a monkey and never misses a shot with a slingshot.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:


* Oh. My. Word. This troper has been stunned by the complete and utter lack of research on anything and everything to do with weapons and combat. Considering the entire series is based on a premise of combat, that's hard to swallow.
** Some examples include arrow "sheaths", bows and arrows that are, if their description is to be believed, made of silver or gold, arrows packed with so much explosive they can blow the tail off a bomber plane, and bows that are mostly devoid of outward enhancements but allow the user to shoot accurately at a distance of over 100 meters.
*** Although in defence of technical enhancements of the arrows: It ''is'' the future after all, and if the Capitol can find a way to create genetically enhanced supercreatures, the technology probably exists to make an arrow appear to be silver or gold, or carry enough junk in the trunk to do some decent incendiary damage. If we're going to argue about the technology behind the weapons, let's start with the fact that Finnick's trident in the third book will return to him on command...
**** Future or not, too many of those things (Finnick's trident included) break the laws of physics and are just not possible.
*** In relation to that, Katniss is apparently a fugitive Tolkien elf related to Legolas, if her shooting ability is to be believed. She always shoots her kills in the eye--even though they're usually rabbits and squirrels. This troper is baffled as to how and why she picked up this skill when she was supposed to be hunting to assuage her family's desperate need for food. Or why anyone would ask her if she had ever shot a hummingbird with an arrow in the extremely not-hummingbird-friendly climate of Panem.
** The author also appears to think that traditional bows and crossbows are the same thing. Though Katniss strings her bow at one point, she also "loads" it. There's some mention of a "notch" but never a "nock" and one character even shoulders one of the more technologically advanced models--before aiming it around the room and sighting through the scope. But there is otherwise no evidence that Katness or said character knows how to handle a crossbow.
*** It's never implicitly stated that Gale's bow is a crossbow, which makes the scope and bells and whistles make even less sense. Even if it is a crossbow, there's a catch-22 wherein he can cast and load in time with Katniss and her recurve.
**** Pardon. This troper meant to point out that the actions Gale takes with the bow sound like a crossbow is being referred to, adding to the impression that the author doesn't understand the difference.
** The author also seems to think that a big guy wielding a great big sword always has the advantage--even over a smart, swift bit of nothing that can hop from tree to tree like a monkey and never misses a shot with a slingshot.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


*** RealityIsUnrealistic. One could also use as a point of reference the human sacrifice rituals of certain ancient cultures. Generally the person to be sacrificed was treated like a god or king for a certain amount of time, and then killed. It's not an unfamiliar theme in fiction, either: In contemporary lit there's a good example in W. D. Valgardson's ''Bloodflowers'': a man is a god among men for a year, given whatever he pleases, and killed as part of a ritual spring sacrifice. The entire environment Katniss describes in the Capitol serves as a foil to the grittiness of the Arena, and without describing how lavish and simultaneously disgusting the Capitol is by treating its tributes like gods, one would miss that. To simply say "the celebrations are horrible because we're just going to die anyway" not only goes against Katniss' rather cavalier nature wherein death is just another part of life, but also would be incredibly poor writing because there wouldn't be much to back it up.

to:

*** RealityIsUnrealistic. One could also use as a point RealityIsUnrealistic, then. Plenty of reference the ancient human sacrifice rituals involved a period of certain ancient cultures. Generally time beforehand wherein the person to be sacrificed victim was treated like a god or king for a certain amount of time, and then killed.deity. It's not an unfamiliar theme in fiction, either: In contemporary lit there's a good example in W. D. Valgardson's ''Bloodflowers'': a man is a god among men for a year, given whatever he pleases, and killed as part of a ritual spring sacrifice. The entire environment Katniss describes in the Capitol serves as a foil to the grittiness of the Arena, and without describing how lavish and simultaneously disgusting the Capitol is by treating its tributes like gods, one would miss that. To simply say "the celebrations are horrible because we're just going to die anyway" not only goes against Katniss' rather cavalier nature wherein death is just another part of life, but also would be incredibly poor writing because there wouldn't be much to back it up.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


*** One could also use as a point of reference the human sacrifice rituals of certain ancient cultures. Generally the person to be sacrificed was treated like a god or king for a certain amount of time, and then killed. Take from contemporary lit the example of W. D. Valgardson's ''Bloodflowers'': a man is a god among men for a year, given whatever he pleases, and killed as part of a ritual spring sacrifice. The entire environment Katniss describes in the Capitol serves as a foil to the grittiness of the Arena, and without describing how lavish and simultaneously disgusting the Capitol is by treating its tributes like gods, one would miss that. To simply say "the celebrations are horrible because we're just going to die anyway" not only goes against Katniss' rather cavalier nature wherein death is just another part of life, but also would be incredibly poor writing because there wouldn't be much to back it up.

to:

*** RealityIsUnrealistic. One could also use as a point of reference the human sacrifice rituals of certain ancient cultures. Generally the person to be sacrificed was treated like a god or king for a certain amount of time, and then killed. Take from It's not an unfamiliar theme in fiction, either: In contemporary lit the there's a good example of in W. D. Valgardson's ''Bloodflowers'': a man is a god among men for a year, given whatever he pleases, and killed as part of a ritual spring sacrifice. The entire environment Katniss describes in the Capitol serves as a foil to the grittiness of the Arena, and without describing how lavish and simultaneously disgusting the Capitol is by treating its tributes like gods, one would miss that. To simply say "the celebrations are horrible because we're just going to die anyway" not only goes against Katniss' rather cavalier nature wherein death is just another part of life, but also would be incredibly poor writing because there wouldn't be much to back it up.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None



to:

*** One could also use as a point of reference the human sacrifice rituals of certain ancient cultures. Generally the person to be sacrificed was treated like a god or king for a certain amount of time, and then killed. Take from contemporary lit the example of W. D. Valgardson's ''Bloodflowers'': a man is a god among men for a year, given whatever he pleases, and killed as part of a ritual spring sacrifice. The entire environment Katniss describes in the Capitol serves as a foil to the grittiness of the Arena, and without describing how lavish and simultaneously disgusting the Capitol is by treating its tributes like gods, one would miss that. To simply say "the celebrations are horrible because we're just going to die anyway" not only goes against Katniss' rather cavalier nature wherein death is just another part of life, but also would be incredibly poor writing because there wouldn't be much to back it up.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:


* The typical misunderstandings about gladitorial combat abound, and no one is surprised. This troper has learned to ignore that. What she can't ignore is the fact that despite wanting the Hunger Games to last a long time, the Capitol does everything in its power to make sure that's impossible. Most of the tributes have no training (and only get three days to train), many of them are underfed and/or sickly, and a cornucopia is set up at the very beginning of the Games, full of weapons and supplies. The ensuing bloodbath over said supplies usually wipes out about half the contestants.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** Yes, because the premise of teenagers killing one another for the amusement of a richer society was never ''intended'' to be enjoyable to begin with. Mockingjay was true to life and very realistic because it shows that sometimes life is goddamn unfair, that people will always be people, and that nothing comes without losses. This coming from a troper who has a parent who suffers from PTSD- just like Katniss, whose life post-war is written with painful realism. If you're going to draw anything from these books, make it a lesson instead of enjoyment: Imagine that Panem ''will'' exist in some-odd hundred years, and try to make changes with your own lifetime that will prevent the outcome that Mockingjay had.

to:

** Yes, because the premise of teenagers killing one another for the amusement of a richer society was never ''intended'' to be enjoyable to begin with. Mockingjay was true to life and very realistic because it shows that sometimes life is goddamn unfair, that people will always be people, and that nothing comes without losses. This coming from a troper who has a parent who suffers from PTSD- just like Katniss, whose life post-war is written with painful realism. If you're going to draw anything from these books, make it a lesson instead of enjoyment: Imagine that Panem ''will'' exist in some-odd hundred years, and try to make changes with within your own lifetime that will prevent the outcome that Mockingjay had.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

** Yes, because the premise of teenagers killing one another for the amusement of a richer society was never ''intended'' to be enjoyable to begin with. Mockingjay was true to life and very realistic because it shows that sometimes life is goddamn unfair, that people will always be people, and that nothing comes without losses. This coming from a troper who has a parent who suffers from PTSD- just like Katniss, whose life post-war is written with painful realism. If you're going to draw anything from these books, make it a lesson instead of enjoyment: Imagine that Panem ''will'' exist in some-odd hundred years, and try to make changes with your own lifetime that will prevent the outcome that Mockingjay had.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

* Mockingjay. Just... Just Mockingjay. Did Collins ''really'' feel the need to kill off [[spoiler: Finnick and ''Prim'']]??? Did she ''really'' need to [[spoiler: make Gale and Katniss's mother]] effectively disappear? Did she HAVE to make it so goddamn depressing to the point where it was hardly enjoyable?!
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None



to:

*** Gladiators were different. They were like athletes. The tributes are more like sacrifices (hence the name), who would only ever be in the Games once and then would be forgotten, except for the winner. It's less like gladiators being celebrities and more like if you celebrated your pig's birthday with a party, then had it for breakfast the next morning. I can understand the author using that contradiction to show how screwed-up the Capitol is, but if that's the case, she should have placed far more emphasis on that aspect of the celebrations rather than focusing on the celebrations themselves.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

*** Anyone interested in further attempting to give Katniss a ''Big Honking Sue'' title should first review CommonMarySueTraits, to be sure.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None



to:

** Ooookay. 1) Two guys who have known her forever. That's not irresistible. 2) She was fine before her father died, and there are many reasons on a broader societal level for that hard childhood. And many had it worse, and this is acknowledged. 3) She doesn't ''conveniently'' have those skills. The aforementioned (and justified) impoverished childhood required her to develop the skills needed to survive in a forested environment. The Hunger Games required her, likewise, to survive in a forested environment. She didn't actually use any skills that wouldn't reasonably be acquired by learning to hunt, scavenge and camp. 4) She spent years learning, she was tutored, and she sucked when she started. 5) Singing is ''one'' common trait, and as I recall, she's an okay singer, but not Idina Menzel. Seriously, when did Sue become synonymous with "girl who can kick ass"? Do you want me to list the number of hot male action heroes who can hunt and fight?
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** They don't say hardship breeds talent for a reason: At least she uses skills she developed before training, and with legit explanation (which is to say, she didn't take up archery because she felt like it, nor did she get immediately good at it). On the other side of things, she's quite frankly a bitch a lot of the time, she's socially awkward, a loner, she has a grand total of three friends, and it's implied she's as hairy as a friggin' Sasquatch. There's two boys who love her, both who have been at least acquainted with her for years. She's not infallible, and she's not particularly noble when she's running on base instinct, either. Even if you run her through a litmus test she usually only tops out at about 35. This troper calls a case of AlternativeCharacterInterpretation, which by the way we are all entitled to.

to:

** They don't say hardship breeds talent for a reason: At least she uses skills she developed before training, and with legit explanation (which is to say, she didn't take up archery because she felt like it, nor did she get immediately good at it). On the other side of things, she's quite frankly a bitch a lot of the time, she's socially awkward, a loner, she has a grand total of three friends, and it's implied she's as hairy as a friggin' Sasquatch. There's two boys who love her, both who have been at least acquainted with her for years. She's not infallible, and she's not particularly noble when she's running on base instinct, either. Even if you run her through a litmus test she usually only tops out at about 35.10. This troper calls a case of AlternativeCharacterInterpretation, which by the way we are all entitled to.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** They don't say hardship breeds talent for a reason: At least she uses skills she developed before training, and with legit explanation (which is to say, she didn't take up archery because she felt like it, nor did she get immediately good at it). On the other side of things, she's quite frankly a bitch a lot of the time, she's socially awkward, a loner, she has a grand total of three friends, and it's implied she's as hairy as a friggin' Sasquatch. There's two boys who love her, both who have been at least acquainted with her for years. She's not infallible, and she's not particularly noble when she's running on base instinct, either. This troper calls a case of AlternativeCharacterInterpretation, which by the way we are all entitled to.

to:

** They don't say hardship breeds talent for a reason: At least she uses skills she developed before training, and with legit explanation (which is to say, she didn't take up archery because she felt like it, nor did she get immediately good at it). On the other side of things, she's quite frankly a bitch a lot of the time, she's socially awkward, a loner, she has a grand total of three friends, and it's implied she's as hairy as a friggin' Sasquatch. There's two boys who love her, both who have been at least acquainted with her for years. She's not infallible, and she's not particularly noble when she's running on base instinct, either. Even if you run her through a litmus test she usually only tops out at about 35. This troper calls a case of AlternativeCharacterInterpretation, which by the way we are all entitled to.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* KATNISS IS A SUE. A big stinking Mary Sue. She's ~irresitable, has had a hard and neglected childhood, but conveniently has EXACTLY the right traits (and then some: Singing? Come on) to help her survive not only extreme poverty, but the god damned Hunger Games. I could tolerate the rest of the book (despite it being from her POV) but every time her exceptional Sueyness shows up, I'm tempted to throw it at a wall.

to:

* KATNISS IS A SUE. A big stinking Mary Sue. She's ~irresitable, irresistible, has had a hard and neglected childhood, but conveniently has EXACTLY the right traits (and then some: Singing? Come on) to help her survive not only extreme poverty, but the god damned Hunger Games. I could tolerate the rest of the book (despite it being from her POV) but every time her exceptional Sueyness shows up, I'm tempted to throw it at a wall.
** They don't say hardship breeds talent for a reason: At least she uses skills she developed before training, and with legit explanation (which is to say, she didn't take up archery because she felt like it, nor did she get immediately good at it). On the other side of things, she's quite frankly a bitch a lot of the time, she's socially awkward, a loner, she has a grand total of three friends, and it's implied she's as hairy as a friggin' Sasquatch. There's two boys who love her, both who have been at least acquainted with her for years. She's not infallible, and she's not particularly noble when she's running on base instinct, either. This troper calls a case of AlternativeCharacterInterpretation, which by the way we are all entitled to.

Added: 506

Changed: 8

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* Ohh boy... Let's start with the exposition. This troper was personally annoyed by how long the exposition was. In my opinion, the author should've stopped beating around the bush and actually started the Hunger Games about a ''hundred'' pages before she did. This ties in with something else that annoyed me: namely, that Tributes are treated like celebrities and given a parade, makeovers, interviews, etc. Treating them like honored guests before their final showdown (good meals, nice clothes, a nice place to stay) is acceptable, but it just doesn't make any sense to treat them like beloved celebrities before forcing them to fight to the death. Plus, it delayed the actual Games, which was ''the reason I bought the book''. In addition to those, I hated the Katniss/Peeta romance. I felt that it was poorly done, and that the author kept [[RetCon retconning]] Peeta's feelings for Katniss for no particular reason (He hints that [[LoveInterest he loves her]], then admits it on live TV! But then [[spoiler: it turns out [[SubvertedTrope he faked it for the PR]]!]] But then [[spoiler: he really did love her, and it turns out he [[DoubleSubversion faked faking it for the PR]]!]]) And then there's the fact that Peeta is TheLoad and is utterly useless except for [[spoiler: rescuing Katniss once]] and [[spoiler: killing Foxface by being too inept to tell poisonous berries apart from edible ones.]] * deep breath* Okay, I'm done. Other than that, good book.

to:

* Ohh boy... Let's start with the exposition. This troper was personally annoyed by how long the exposition was. In my opinion, the author should've stopped beating around the bush and actually started the Hunger Games about a ''hundred'' pages before she did. This ties in with something else that annoyed me: namely, that Tributes are treated like celebrities and given a parade, makeovers, interviews, etc. Treating them like honored guests before their final showdown (good meals, nice clothes, a nice place to stay) is acceptable, but it just doesn't make any sense to treat them like beloved celebrities before forcing them to fight to the death. Plus, it delayed the actual Games, which was ''the reason I bought the book''. In addition to those, I hated the Katniss/Peeta romance. I felt that it was poorly done, and that the author kept [[RetCon retconning]] Peeta's feelings for Katniss for no particular reason (He hints that [[LoveInterest he loves her]], then admits it on live TV! But then [[spoiler: it turns out [[SubvertedTrope he faked it for the PR]]!]] But then [[spoiler: he really did love her, and it turns out he [[DoubleSubversion faked faking it for the PR]]!]]) And then there's the fact that Peeta is TheLoad and is utterly useless except for [[spoiler: rescuing Katniss once]] and [[spoiler: killing Foxface by being too inept to tell poisonous berries apart from edible ones.]] * deep *deep breath* Okay, I'm done. Other than that, good book.



*** Which, by the way, isn't unrealistic at all. At the height of the popularity of gladiatorial combat in Rome, some gladiators were superstars. Merchandising was dedicated to gladiators (they were painted on ceramics, jewelery, walls, etc), and there were favorites who had celebrity status and plenty of devoted fans. The point of the prelude that the author included to the games was to emphasize the total cruelty of TheGovernment, and how delusional and ethically confused the Capitol's citizens are.



** Her name was Rue, and keep in mind she * was* only 12, and underfed, more so than Katniss and Peeta. it was pretty much a miracle she survived as long as she did, even with her speed. and this troper would have tossed away the book if Katniss had killed the little girl she considered her sister.

to:

** Her name was Rue, and keep in mind she * was* ''was'' only 12, and underfed, more so than Katniss and Peeta. it was pretty much a miracle she survived as long as she did, even with her speed. and this troper would have tossed away the book if Katniss had killed the little girl she considered her sister.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


* You'd think that after possibly hundreds of years, or at least with North American being fused into one country, they'd be using the metric system.
But no, wishful thinking.
** Wasn't there some sort of war that destroyed cities? I doubt switching to the metric system was really a priority.

Added: 418

Changed: 42

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None


** Peeta seems pretty sure that the Capitol made the muttations seem like they had been made with Tributes' DNA, but weren't really. I think it was to create some nice <i>Mind Rape</i> for the remaining Tributes. I thought that the "Rue" muttation was snarling in hatred at Katniss was a hint that it wasn't really Rue, even if its eyes <i>looked</i> like hers. There's another muttation scene in <i>Catching Fire</i> that seems to support the idea that it's easier for the Capitol to fake involving humans in the creation of muttations, and it gets the same horrified results. I'm hoping that Collins will follow through on this in <i>Mockingjay</i>.

to:

** Peeta seems pretty sure that the Capitol made the muttations seem like they had been made with Tributes' DNA, but weren't really. I think it was to create some nice <i>Mind Rape</i> MindRape for the remaining Tributes. I thought that the "Rue" muttation was snarling in hatred at Katniss was a hint that it wasn't really Rue, even if its eyes <i>looked</i> ''looked'' like hers. There's another muttation scene in <i>Catching Fire</i> ''Catching Fire'' that seems to support the idea that it's easier for the Capitol to fake involving humans in the creation of muttations, and it gets the same horrified results. I'm hoping that Collins will follow through on this in <i>Mockingjay</i>.
''Mockingjay''.

*KATNISS IS A SUE. A big stinking Mary Sue. She's ~irresitable, has had a hard and neglected childhood, but conveniently has EXACTLY the right traits (and then some: Singing? Come on) to help her survive not only extreme poverty, but the god damned Hunger Games. I could tolerate the rest of the book (despite it being from her POV) but every time her exceptional Sueyness shows up, I'm tempted to throw it at a wall.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None



to:

*** Katniss says herself she lost a lot of weight when she came out of the Games and that was on a diet of Rabbit, some occasional berries and other foraged food and also food from Haymitch
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

*** The thing is that we're seeing this from Katniss's perspective. Katniss is unsure of Peeta's true intentions and feelings and every new thing he says causes her to question what he's doing. We're seeing her trying to figure out what Peeta is doing through his choices, and because she's extremely suspicious of him, all of his actions affect her viewpoint of him and cause her to alter her perceptions of him just about every time he does something. The problem with this is that a lot of readers can see that [[spoiler: Peeta is being genuine the entire time]] and at least a few of said readers are PO'd at Katniss for not seeing it the way they do (this troper included).
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None



to:

*** I think it would have been more "convenient" if Katniss had had to kill Rue. Think about it this way: there are twenty-four people and all of them know that in order to survive, the other twenty-three people have to die. This is a solid fact of which they are all aware from the word go. Even though alliances are formed, there's never a point in the Games when there isn't someone trying to kill any given person. In order to make the most "dramatic" showdown, the Gamemakers specifically engineered a rule change to get Peeta and Katniss together. In other words, the chances of this happening without the Gamemakers doing it on purpose? Pretty slim. It's suggested that alliances are called off before it gets too far down to the wire specifically so "friends" (such as they are in the arena) stand a better chance of not having to face off against each other. It makes much more sense that the less dramatic outcome, Rue being cut down by one of the Careers, would come to pass. There are many, many different ways to die in the arena. They're talked about at great length over the course of the books. It would take Gamemaker intervention to ensure that something like a final standoff between Rue and Katniss would happen. And why would they care about the Rue/Katniss angle? There have probably been hundreds of such friendships over the course of the Games. The Peeta/Katniss angle is less common, more riveting, more tragic (to the Capitol folks). If they're going to put effort into anything, it's going to be that. And so Rue, like the other tributes, is just another piece of trash to be tossed out in the name of making good television, and it doesn't really matter to them how it happens, so long as it's bloody.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

** Peeta seems pretty sure that the Capitol made the muttations seem like they had been made with Tributes' DNA, but weren't really. I think it was to create some nice <i>Mind Rape</i> for the remaining Tributes. I thought that the "Rue" muttation was snarling in hatred at Katniss was a hint that it wasn't really Rue, even if its eyes <i>looked</i> like hers. There's another muttation scene in <i>Catching Fire</i> that seems to support the idea that it's easier for the Capitol to fake involving humans in the creation of muttations, and it gets the same horrified results. I'm hoping that Collins will follow through on this in <i>Mockingjay</i>.

Changed: 206

Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None



to:

** IMO Katniss and Rue should have been the last two alive. I mean, that was DEFINITELY the most dramatic option. But NOOO, the author had to go with the pointless and uninteresting Katniss/Peeta romance.
Is there an issue? Send a MessageReason:
None

Added DiffLines:

*For the most part, I really liked this book. The suspense kept me reading until I finished the book. However two points really bother me about the book. 1. It is repeatedly pointed out that the games are being televised. However, I am left wondering where the cameras are and how they can get such good shots of the tributes. Is every tree and rock equipped with a concealed camera? I can suspend disbelief at the genetically engineered animals, but have a hard time suspending disbelief at the idea of such a huge arena having every square inch monitored both visually and aurally. 2. What was with the muttations? At the end of the book when they appeared it is implied that they are created from the DNA of the dead tributes. What exactly is the point of this? Does this mean that they have the minds and memories of the other tributes? These questions are never answered or even mentioned again leading to one BigLippedAlligatorMoment

Top