Ah… The age-old question of which is better: the book or the movie. Unfortunately, it’s one of those questions we’ll probably never agree on, as people have very compelling arguments on both sides. Take the Hunger Games, for example; are those books better than the movies?
The Hunger Games books are better than the movies if you want to get more detail, learn more about Katniss’ inner thoughts, and fully immerse yourself in the world. However, if you’re a more visually stimulated person, you might prefer The Hunger Games movies.
In my opinion, The Hunger Games books are far superior to the movies; however, if you were to ask a dear friend of mine the same question, she’d tell you it was the other way around. This article takes an objective look at the issue, outlining the various ways the books are better than the movies and vice versa. Also, here’s your obligatory spoiler alert; if you haven’t read the books or watched the films, turn back now!
Why the Hunger Games Books Are Better Than the Movies
There are several things about the three Hunger Games books that are better done than the movies. However, the most significant advantage to reading the books is that you get to know more about what’s happening inside Katniss’ head.
In the movies, Jennifer Lawrence does a phenomenal job of bringing Katniss to life and showcasing the complexity of her feelings and emotions. Unfortunately, without some kind of voice-over, which the movies don’t have, the watcher can’t experience the ever-present internal monologue happening throughout the books.
Furthermore, the relationship drama between Katniss, Gale, and Peeta is much more involved and multi-faceted in the books. The love triangle still exists in the movies, but it’s not nearly as complicated and doesn’t have the same depth of emotion.
For example, while the movie does a decent job of showing that Katniss doesn’t feel the same way about Peeta as he does about her, it doesn’t hold a candle to the clarity with which the books starkly portray her lack of romantic feelings for him. That’s what makes it all the more romantic and heartwarming that they finally end up together.
Other things the books did better than the movies include:
- The books are darker and less “kid-friendly.” For example, in the books, Peeta loses a leg; in the movies, the medics manage to save it.
- The role of the Avoxes is much more significant in the books. In the movies, we see them, but that’s about it.
- Katniss’ imprisonment scene after shooting Coin was much darker and more detailed. Furthermore, the reader better understands her reasons for doing so in the books.
- The books provide more opportunities for world-building. They also include a lot more of the districts than the movies.
- District 13 is more significant in the books. It’s more of an afterthought in the movies.
- The movies do an excellent job with Katniss’ character arc. Unfortunately, they didn’t devote as much time and attention to Peeta, who has an incredible character journey in the books.
Now, let’s look at some of the ways the movies outshone the books.
Why the Hunger Games Movies Are Better Than the Books
According to a staff writer at CinemaBlend, there’s one reason the Hunger Games movies are better than the books: Jennifer Lawrence. This writer isn’t wrong. Despite being years older than Katniss’ character, Jennifer Lawrence is Katniss Everdeen. She brought the character to life in a way I’m not sure anyone else could have.
Seeing her in action is so much better than anything most of us could conjure up in our imaginations. She was perfect for the role and made the movie a whopping success.
The other casting decisions were spot-on, as well. Woody Harrelson as Haymitch, Josh Hutcherson as Peeta, and Elizabeth Banks as Effie were all perfect choices. Even Lenny Kravitz (Cinna) and Donald Sutherland (President Snow) were inspired casting decisions.
The cast truly brought the books to life, and that’s always the first step to a superb book-to-movie conversion.
The action scenes and special effects were also spectacularly done, and the sad, heartbreaking moments came through so much more strongly in a visual medium.
Here are a couple of other ways in which the movies were superior to the books:
- The Capitol members and villains had more depth and complexity in the movies. In the book, they were static characters – bad, all the time. The movies do a better job of making them seem more human with layers.
- Katniss has more say in her choices in the movies. In the books, she’s more pawn-like; the films give her agency.
As you can see, there are certainly advantages to checking out the movies.
How Many Hunger Games Movies and Books Are There?
There are four Hunger Games movies and three original Hunger Games books. However, in May 2020, a fourth Hunger Games book was released. It’s The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes, a prequel that tells the story of President Snow’s boyhood long before he was the Capitol’s president.
The Hunger Games movies follow the first three books in the original series. There are four of them because the producers split the third book into two movie installments. The film franchise includes:
- The Hunger Games
- The Hunger Games Catching Fire
- The Hunger Games Mockingjay Part 1
- The Hunger Games Mockingjay Part 2
The books share the same names: The Hunger Games, Catching Fire, and Mockingjay. They came out in 2008, 2009, and 2010 respectively. The movies premiered in 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2015. It takes about 9 hours and 8 minutes to watch all four movies back to back.
You may also be wondering: How long does it take to read the Hunger Games books? (You will find a detailed answer in a blog post previously published on this site.)
Read more: What Age Is Appropriate To Read The Hunger Games?
Final Thoughts
Whether the Hunger Games books or movies are better depends entirely on the person reading or watching them. Both formats have their advantages, and both are worthwhile uses of your time.
My advice? Read the books. Then watch the movies. Determine for yourself which medium you prefer. Either way, you won’t be disappointed.
