Hunger games should have had an R rating

[ishiki]

pokeclaudel said:

I did watch Battle Roayle. I don't watch a lot of Japanese movies but the acting in that movie was terrible and over the top. I couldn't get that feeling of sadness when they died because all the characters were suppose to be kids around 14 years old but most of the actors in that movie looked like they were 20. One thing I liked about Hunger Games is at least they cast actual kids to play kids instead of adults(at least in the minor roles). How hard is it to get a 14 year old person in Japan? I never felt a loss for anyone because of that reason except maybe the suicide victims.

that's kind of the point though, it's a B movie like escape from new york, assault on precinct 13. Doesn't mean you have to like it but it's in the vein of those movies.

The hunger games seemed like a B movie, with a weird mish-mash, of high production values, but a somewhat campy story.

What are you talking about the main actors are older in hunger games... jennifer lawrence is 21 Josh Hutcherson was 19. Tatsuya Fujiwara (the main character) was 18 when battle royale was made, and Noriko Nakagawa was 15 (the female lead).

OT: The hunger games was made PG-13 for monetary reasons, and it was the correct decision(financially) because as an R movie it would not have been as near as successful. . It wasn't an amazing movie, but it was really entertaining, and if a movie is that, it's successful in my book. A directors cut with gore would probably mean that they filmed scenes without shaky cam, and with more gore, and I don't think they did this. I hope I'm wrong.

 I've read the book, and there's nothing exactly groundbreaking here, nothing that, the running man, lord of the flies or battle royale and probably a lot of others didn't do before it. However it's books sequals are more interesting imo.