# Hunger Games Trilogy discussion -- COMBINED thread



## Cindy416 (May 2, 2009)

Just finished reading _The Hunger Games_, which I found to be quite good. Now, I'm trying to decide whether to take the plunge and read _Catching Fire_ next, followed by _Mocking-Jay_. My TBR list is extremely long, and I'm anxious to get to some of the other books, but am wondering if those of you who have read the trilogy recommend total immersion in the series, rather than spacing the books out. (I realize that everyone is different, but I'd love to hear your opinions.) Thanks!


----------



## Patricia (Dec 30, 2008)

I tried spacing them out and am on the last one.  But in retrospect, I'd read them in succession.


----------



## teashopgirl (Dec 8, 2011)

I think I'd read them in succession. Catching Fire is terrific.


----------



## kindlegrl81 (Jan 19, 2010)

If I can read a series back to back, I usually try to.  If too much time passes between books then I usually forget little details, which bugs me so I have to re-read the previous book and it ends up taking even longer to finish the series.


----------



## Cindy416 (May 2, 2009)

Thanks for your speedy replies. My daughters and I share an Amazon account, and of them bought the books several months ago. I'm wanting to try TGWTDT before the movie comes out, but I may have to wait a bit on that.


----------



## LilianaHart (Jun 20, 2011)

I'd read them back to back. The second one is fantastic.


----------



## purplepen79 (May 6, 2010)

I'd recommend reading them in quick succession, as there are details/hints dropped in the first book that become important plot points in the second and third books.  Also, the emotional impact of the overall story of the trilogy (specifically for me seeing Katniss's development over the course of all three books) packs more of a punch if you read them one after the other.


----------



## Cuechick (Oct 28, 2008)

I agree, I read them one after the other... why not? The others can wait.


----------



## KindleGirl (Nov 11, 2008)

I agree, read them all together. I tend to forget details if I wait too long.


----------



## Cindy416 (May 2, 2009)

Thanks for your advice. I knew I could count on my fellow KBers.


----------



## Nancy O&#039;Hara (Jan 5, 2012)

To my surprise I read them all. In succession. I tried reading something else after the first one, but there was an itch I had to scratch and went to the 2nd and then the 3rd. Enjoyed the immersion and Katniss. It'll be interesting to see what they do with the movie.


----------



## purplepen79 (May 6, 2010)

Nancy O'Hara said:


> It'll be interesting to see what they do with the movie.


After seeing the preview over the holiday season (I think it was when a friend dragged me to see Sherlock Holmes), I'm very interested in seeing the movie--aside from the third Batman movie (the Nolan brothers are the bestest ) coming out in 2012, Hunger Games has become my most anticipated movie-to-see because of the preview. It helps that I enjoyed the series, though sometimes when I enjoy reading a book, I don't necessarily want to see the movie. Not the case with this one, though. Also, they filmed parts of it around here (western NC), which adds another layer to my fascination. Sorry for the thread digression, but the preview is still playing in my head three weeks later. It looked that good.


----------



## Carol (was Dara) (Feb 19, 2011)

kindlegrl81 said:


> If I can read a series back to back, I usually try to. If too much time passes between books then I usually forget little details, which bugs me so I have to re-read the previous book and it ends up taking even longer to finish the series.


This. I read all the books in the trilogy back to back and am glad I did or I don't think I'd have remembered some things, like who the minor characters were. And add me to the list of those waiting for the movie to come out.


----------



## Jack Blaine (May 9, 2011)

I read them in quick succession.  LOVED the first one.


----------



## Brad Murgen (Oct 17, 2011)

Right them right in a row.  They are pretty short and move at a fast pace.


----------



## LeoHopkins (Jan 9, 2012)

I'd have to agree that there is definitely and "itch" to read the others and continue the story but I don't think you have to to enjoy them.

And since I am new around here I'll ask as some places are very militant about it and others are not. Would it be kosher to start a discussion of these books here or start a fresh thread? Mind you I have not delved down into this forum to see if there is a "Hunger Games" thread and would before moving forward on either front but the thought occurred to me here and so I need to "get it on paper" before it is gone forever!   

Again, apologies, I do not mean to hijack this thread and you are more than welcome to slap me around, ignore me or tell me to get lost.


----------



## Cindy416 (May 2, 2009)

LeoHopkins said:


> I'd have to agree that there is definitely and "itch" to read the others and continue the story but I don't think you have to to enjoy them.
> 
> And since I am new around here I'll ask as some places are very militant about it and others are not. Would it be kosher to start a discussion of these books here or start a fresh thread? Mind you I have not delved down into this forum to see if there is a "Hunger Games" thread and would before moving forward on either front but the thought occurred to me here and so I need to "get it on paper" before it is gone forever!
> 
> Again, apologies, I do not mean to hijack this thread and you are more than welcome to slap me around, ignore me or tell me to get lost.


I've started reading _Catching Fire_, and am already about 40% through it.

As for the boards here, I would suggest starting a thread about this series or one of the books in particular. If there is already a thread for the series or one book, I haven't found it. The people here, including the moderators, are very nice, and if you post something in the wrong place, the moderator will move it to the proper place. A lot of people love the books in this particular trilogy, and I would think that there would be some good discussion. It seems unlikely that someone, at some point, hasn't started such a discussion, but I haven't run across it.

No need to apologize about hijacking this thread. I found out what I wanted to know, so any other discussion about the series is added incentive for me to carve more time out of my busy schedule in which to read.

By the way, welcome to the Kindle Boards. I hope you enjoy your time here as much as I have. I've been here almost 3 years, and it is the one place that I have to keep open on my computers, iPad, iPhone, etc. so that I can stay in touch with the many kindred spirits with whom I've shared many thoughts.


----------



## Guest (Jan 10, 2012)

To be honest, I loved the first one and hated the last two. I'm not sure I would even bother with two and three unless you feel you absolutely have to know how it ends.


----------



## Jan Strnad (May 27, 2010)

Okay, I am not the target audience for _The Hunger Games_. Basically, I'm too damned old and cynical and been-around-the-blockish. But I figured I'd dip my toe into the first book and see what the brouhaha was about and move quickly on, probably not even bothering to finish the first chapter.

So I started reading and, to my surprise, found myself enjoying the book!

Last night I was awake at 3:00 a.m. wondering what was going on with Katniss, and I nudged my wife and told her I was going to get up and read for awhile....

I expect I'll be going straight to the second book when I finish the first!


----------



## LeoHopkins (Jan 9, 2012)

Well, it looks like there might be an interest in a discussion. I'll start a thread for easier future reference and so you aren't "spoiled" on the remaining books.


----------



## LeoHopkins (Jan 9, 2012)

I have been running this one around in my head for awhile and, since there seems to be an interest, and I've actually joined I can finally get some feedback.

I won't go into too much depth tonight as it is late here but to start I am nowhere near the target audience for these books by more than 30 years so please keep that in mind as you read what I have to say.

First, my reason for reading these books. I am a fan of Hugh Laurie and when I kept getting hits on Hunger Games pages saying he should play Haymitch Abernathy I wanted to see who this character was and if that seemed like a good fit (Yes, but I knew it would never happen).

I truly have mixed feelings about this trilogy. I'm not sure how to put this but an old writing adage puts forth that a writer should shows us, not tell us. I found the entire trilogy to be too much tell, not enough show.

Also, for the most part Katniss annoyed me. That is not necessarily bad as in generally teenagers annoy me so Suzanne Collins captured that aspect well. I also think many of the secondary characters were intriguing enough that I wanted to know more about them. Of course I am partial to Haymitch but Cinna, Plutarch, and many of the other mentors caught my interest as well. Frankly I wanted to know more about them than I did about Katniss and Peeta, and the other "kids".

But it was interesting enough for me to read all three books and I look forward to the movies, although I think they have made fundamental changes to those intriguing secondary characters that may turn completely change the tone of the movie from the books.


----------



## Geemont (Nov 18, 2008)

I read The Hunger Games for an online book club.  While everyone else said they liked it, I thought the novel about as I interesting as a McDonalds hamburger or a Summer movie, IMHO.  But I guess there are a lot of readers who eat that stuff up.  Or maybe you have to be 13 or in tune with your inner 13 self.

I never read the other books and have no intention of seeing the movie.


----------



## Carolyn62 (Sep 5, 2011)

I've read the trilogy and enjoyed it. I refuse to admit how far over the suggested age I am.    I don't know if I'll see the movie or not because I'm usually disappointed by movies based on books I've enjoyed.


----------



## Carol (was Dara) (Feb 19, 2011)

I've read the trilogy and liked it, although I admit I didn't enjoy the second and third books quite as much as the first one. In the beginning I was thrown off balance by the use of present tense in the narration. I love first person novels but it's been a long time since I've read anything first person, present tense and I wasn't initially sure I liked it. But a few pages in I stopped noticing how the story was delivered because I became so wrapped up in the plot. Looking back I realize the present tense was part of what gave it such an intense feel. The action was nonstop and I was experiencing it at the same time as Katniss and (although it exhausted me) it also kept me on the edge of my seat.

There were places where I felt slightly let down because I would've liked things to go in a different direction or because I wanted to see more of some characters and less of others. But the author knew where she wanted to take things and in the end, I can't complain. Okay, I'll complain a little that the ending of the final book wasn't what I was hoping for but I can't tell you what I _was_ hoping for because I don't know myself. Maybe something a little happier but then it wouldn't have matched the overall feel of the books... Anyway, I'm going to say the books deserve the attention they're getting because they really are pretty gripping. Now I'm just waiting for the movie to come out.


----------



## SylviaLucas (Sep 14, 2011)

I haven't read the books, but after seeing the movie previews I'm tempted.


----------



## Malweth (Oct 18, 2009)

I also liked the first book, but thought the follow-up fell flat.

I won't talk about specifics, but I'm fine with open endings, sad endings, etc.  I am not fine with meaningless endings and I thought the thematic elements of the books were not supported by the end of the series.

Collins has made many other strange choices, in my opinion. Her Gregor series seems to be aimed at both the 6-10 year old and 15-20 year old groups. She makes an attempt to define 'tough' words from a child's point of view. This matches the main character's point of view, but the concepts of death and dying she introduces aren't typical for the 6-10 year olds. I think she does this on purpose, but IMO she's a very morbid author.


----------



## leep (Aug 25, 2011)

I tend to agree, the first book was very good I thought, but the second felt almost a re-hash and the third all over the place.

Some interesting ideas ideas and I think it caught the post-apocalyptic dystopian vibe that seems to be around in books at the moment (recession run-off perhaps?).


----------



## PAWilson (Jan 9, 2012)

I read the first book out of curiosity. A number of my friends were discussing it and I thought, what the heck? I really enjoyed them - I'm also outside the target market for the books. What I found most intriguing was the way the author ended the first two books. Both times, I had to buy the next book. She has a great way of putting the hook at the end. 

I found the final resolution somewhat disappointing, but I imagine everyone had their own ideas about what should have happened.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

***two current threads on _The Hunger Games_ have been merged into one -- sorry for any confusion***


----------



## kaykay543 (Jan 10, 2012)

I expected the middle book to be not near as good as the first book. Middle books are (in my opinion) never as good as the first or last book. Strangely though I didn't think that last book was that good either. I was really disappointed and wished I had just read book one and left it there.


----------



## Lursa (aka 9MMare) (Jun 23, 2011)

Jan Strnad said:


> Okay, I am not the target audience for _The Hunger Games_. Basically, I'm too damned old and cynical and been-around-the-blockish. But I figured I'd dip my toe into the first book and see what the brouhaha was about and move quickly on, probably not even bothering to finish the first chapter.
> 
> So I started reading and, to my surprise, found myself enjoying the book!
> 
> ...


Yes, I didnt find them to be very "YAish" at all. The only thing that seemed limited was the sex and I read many crime mysteries, etc that dont have much of that either.

Re: the question: I read the first one and then the 2nd and 3rd months later. Last 2 back to back out of enthusiasm and because the 3rd was already on my Kindle. I dont think you have to read them together tho...I like the development of Panem throughout and it stands alone each time IMO.


----------



## kindlegrl81 (Jan 19, 2010)

I just finished the last book last night...I liked it till the last chapter.



Spoiler



The ending seemed rushed; we don't get to really see what happens since Katniss is yet again injured and unconscious. She doesn't get a good explanation of what happened, so we in turn don't get a good explanation of what happened, at least IMO. If you are going to have the story be in first person, then I don't think it is a good idea to have the main character out of the loop at the very end.


----------



## 41352 (Apr 4, 2011)

Oh great thread! I had the exact same question, and I loved Hunger Games. Looks like I should hurry up and get Catching Fire now.


----------



## purplepen79 (May 6, 2010)

LeoHopkins said:


> First, my reason for reading these books. I am a fan of Hugh Laurie and when I kept getting hits on Hunger Games pages saying he should play Haymitch Abernathy I wanted to see who this character was and if that seemed like a good fit (Yes, but I knew it would never happen).
> 
> I truly have mixed feelings about this trilogy. I'm not sure how to put this but an old writing adage puts forth that a writer should shows us, not tell us. I found the entire trilogy to be too much tell, not enough show.
> 
> Also, for the most part Katniss annoyed me . . . . Of course I am partial to Haymitch but Cinna, Plutarch, and many of the other mentors caught my interest as well. Frankly I wanted to know more about them than I did about Katniss and Peeta, and the other "kids".


Hugh Laurie would have been great as Haymitch! Haymitch just happens to be one of my favorite characters in the series as well. Even though I enjoyed the series (far more than I thought I would when I started the books), I agree with your assessment that there was too much telling and not enough showing in some parts. It usually takes more pages to show than tell, however. _The Hunger Games _ trilogy encompasses a complicated story that really warranted more pages than it got. A lot more pages, IMO. I think that was one of my initial frustrations with Katniss--I wanted more about her and her family--more scenes showing her relationship to Prim and her mother and others in District 12. Instead, we're soon whisked away on an exciting ride to the Capitol. It's a great read, but I wanted to see more of the world and more of the characters than we get to see because what we do get are wonderful tidbits that piqued my interest, tidbits that never got fleshed out totally (at least for me). I almost felt at times that Collins was under some sort of word restriction from the publishers when she was writing, though I certainly have no reason to think that except a weird hunch.


----------



## 4eyesbooks (Jan 9, 2012)

My husband just read this one and liked it.  What does everybody else think....is the book really good or is it overrated?


----------



## hs (Feb 15, 2011)

I loved The Hunger Games! I read it based on a recommendation from someone I know but without having heard all the hype and knowing of the movie, so I didn't really know what to expect going in. I wound up finishing it in two days, which is fast for me. I couldn't put the book down, and when I finished, I immediately looked for Catching Fire and Mockingjay. I liked Catching Fire also, but I didn't like Mockingjay as much.


----------



## jcpilley (Jan 18, 2012)

They do read very quickly and the second one was probably the best. The third one felt like a retread of the first one though, just with a lot more at stake.


----------



## bordercollielady (Nov 21, 2008)

I loved the first two books..  To me - the third one felt like it was written by a different author.  Katniss changed personality and the whole book had a very different feeling.  But I did love the first two..


----------



## Grace Elliot (Mar 14, 2011)

Hugh Laurie as Haymitch - genius idea! 

I'm evangelical about The Hunger Games - I cant stop talking about the books. 
I thought the 3 books each had a different tempo and writing style, which once I got used to, didnt bother me one bit. 
I loved how Collins didnt shy away from writing about mental illness and didnt pretend that the ordeal the young characters had been through wouldn't have affected them mentally.


----------



## purplepen79 (May 6, 2010)

Grace Elliot said:


> Hugh Laurie as Haymitch - genius idea!
> I'm evangelical about The Hunger Games - I cant stop talking about the books.
> I thought the 3 books each had a different tempo and writing style, which once I got used to, didnt bother me one bit.
> I loved how Collins didnt shy away from writing about mental illness and didnt pretend that the ordeal the young characters had been through wouldn't have affected them mentally.


I know a number of people didn't like the end of the third book, but your comment


Spoiler



about mental illness following trauma is exactly why I liked the end of the third book--Katniss has been through a harrowing ordeal, the veteran of a war that cost her so much, and her reaction of feeling numb and of going through the motions with Peeta, her reaction of not wanting to have children but going ahead anyway, while not the happiest of endings, seems realistic to me and actually left me with a great deal of hope. If someone as damaged as Katniss can try to "fake it till she makes it" and eventually settle down and find contentment and invest in the future despite her doubts that it will be any better than the past . . . that's true heroism to me.


----------



## Lynn McNamee (Jan 8, 2009)

I didn't read the second book until several months after I had read the first. That was a mistake, as I had forgotten some things, and there wasn't much backstory in the second.

I have to admit that I didn't bother reading the third. While I enjoyed the first two, I just felt like the third would go places I wasn't interested in visiting.  

From what I've heard of the third, I didn't miss much, so I'm good with that.

I will be seeing the movie as soon as it comes out, though.


----------



## UnicornEmily (Jul 2, 2011)

I was astonished by how much I liked this series.  I did not expect to like it at all, honestly.  It looked dark and grim and boring; dystopian literature doesn't usually please me.  But the first book was absolutely gripping.

So I had to get the second, naturally.  It was every bit as good as the first; not one bit disappointing.  Really interesting ideas and characters, it all flowed logically, and it didn't feel like it was just a lame rehashing or anything.

The third book is the darkest and the grimmest, and there were some things in it that made me wince.  (Not lack of quality, you understand, just "AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!" situations.)  It isn't quite as strong as the first, I think, but very close to it, and it also flows logically.  Very, very good ending, and everything is wrapped up satisfyingly.  I was surprised about certain aspects of the ending (really surprised about a few, actually), but I was completely happy with it.

I also find I was really impressed with the author managing to make me truly root for BOTH potential romances.  I loved both romantic interests and I wanted BOTH to get her; usually I have a pretty firm opinion on which character I find most interesting, but in this case, they were both so strongly developed, and so not-cliche, that I could have been happy with either.  I really felt like they were equally valid options, and it could be entirely the character's decision.  This was a great feeling.

I loved the story's minor emphasis on fashion in propaganda and entertainment things, too.  It seems like a small thing, but really, that was so well done and so cool, because it was so realistic.  It also gave us a really interesting, different type of revolutionary thinker, in the designer who makes awesome clothing for her.

And it really -- in the third book, especially -- dealt with very real problems that can be the consequence of revolutions, such as "the revolutionary leader usually is or becomes just as bad as the nasty horrible person they were trying to take down."  George Washington was not the rule -- he was the exception.  It felt realistic, not idealized.

Overall, just a really, really compelling and well-written series.  I recommend you read the whole thing.


----------



## Cindy416 (May 2, 2009)

I took the advice that most of you proffered, and am about 40% through "Mockingjay" now. I'm surprised how interesting I found the series to be, primarily because I'm not one who usually likes depressing futuristic books. These have all been very good, and have been a great way to take my mind off of the boredom of my treadmill.


----------



## 4eyesbooks (Jan 9, 2012)

So my husband finished Hunger Games last week and he told me it was really good.  I started it last night even though I'm not usually into this genre of book, but I have to say so far I am really liking it.  If I get to the end and enjoy the first book I will definitely read the next one right afterwards.


----------



## martaszemik (Dec 4, 2011)

I read the first two a couple of years ago and I read them one after another. Then I had to wait impatiently for the third one. If I had a choice I'd read them all together. Loved them, although I think the ending of Mockingjay could have been better (not that it was bad, it was good, but I expected something different)


----------



## Jan Strnad (May 27, 2010)

I just finished the second book last night, and I'll admit I stayed up late to do it.

At first I groaned when


Spoiler



they were called back into the arena, just because I was ready for the series to go someplace new. Collins kept my interest, though, with the whole "ally" angle, and I was happy to see the rebellion beginning.



I'm borrowing the books through Amazon Prime so I'm "forced" to wait until next month to begin the third book. I'm keeping my expectations low...or rather, trying not to have any...since the reviews so far are all over the place.


----------



## 31842 (Jan 11, 2011)

I LOOOOVED the first book and really enjoyed the second book, and then started having the same reaction to the third book... until I realized what Suzanne Collins was doing.



Spoiler



In the third book, she turns us, the readers, into the game watchers.

Through out the first two books, we are HORRIFIED that people would tune in to see the Hunger Games. We are horrified that people would be invested in the games and don't understand how they could be angry or feel cheated that Katniss didn't give them the bloodbath ending they wanted.

And yet... that is what "we" feel at the end of the third book.

We are frustrated Katniss passed out before she could blow up the bad guys. Having her sister die is a total bummer and a makes us feel cheated. And what is with all of the realism at the end? The PTSD? The death? All the time spent on how people were damaged by war?

We are upset that we didn't get the Hollywood ending WE wanted. The one with the explosions and the hero who saves the day and everyone running off into the sunset.

We readers looked down upon the citizens and their reaction to the games through the whole series.

But when we readers are given their ending, the ending without an Ultimate Champion, with a heroine who stands atop a hill victorious, we become that which we have abhorred.

We respond exactly as the citizens responded to the end of the Hunger Games.

We ARE the watchers of the Hunger Games.

All the characters we looked down upon and judged in this book, they were just fictional characters. But WE are real. And our emotions are real. And we, as living, breathing human beings, felt cheated that Katniss did not kill enough, that she was not there for the final battle. That we had to look at ugliness instead of entertainment.

And that was when I realized that the third book is a mirror that Suzanne Collins holds up to us, as individuals, to see that the horror of the Hunger Games is much closer than we ever imagined.

And then I realized she was a genius and the third book is absolutely perfect.


----------



## Lursa (aka 9MMare) (Jun 23, 2011)

KateDanley said:


> I LOOOOVED the first book and really enjoyed the second book, and then started having the same reaction to the third book... until I realized what Suzanne Collins was doing.


Well, that doesnt fit _everybody _but then again, nothing does...as you say, we're all individuals.

I read the books to find out more and more about Panem and the new society that had been created. _That _is why I enjoy dystopian fiction. Altho I am interested in survival techniques and weapons, alot of time I quickly skim the violence just the way I often do with sex in books.

I like suspense and plot twists...and Collins did provide that. I enjoyed the series but also drifted away from it the more in-depth she got with the characters & their relationships (that's just me tho, I know I'm in the minority of readers there).

I do agree with whoever said that he/she cringed when


Spoiler



they were called to go back to the arena again....me too. I really didnt need to see all that again.


 And did feel injustice for those characters.


----------



## Cindy416 (May 2, 2009)

I just finished _Mockingjay_, and I have to say that I really liked all three books. They kept me interested throughout the entire series, and I can understand why my son-in-law couldn't put down his Kindle when he was reading the series. Now, I need to find a quick read in my huge arsenal of Kindle books.

I'm in a hurry, or I'd elaborate on the parts that I really liked, the parts that were very emotional for me, etc. I'll try to do that later. All in all, great trilogy!


----------



## Brad Murgen (Oct 17, 2011)

So I finally finished the last book yesterday... I rarely read YA books, but are they all this violent?  I was shocked at how violent they are.


----------



## 31842 (Jan 11, 2011)

Brad Murgen said:


> So I finally finished the last book yesterday... I rarely read YA books, but are they all this violent? I was shocked at how violent they are.


They aren't! It was one of the things that makes The Hunger Games controversial, actually. I, too, was pretty shocked by it. In order to get through the book, I had to think of it in the context of the Roman gladiators. And then, by the time I got to the end of the series, it dawned on me that Suzanne is not actually any more violent than what kids are seeing in movies and video games, she just happens to give the characters a soul instead of making them mindlessly violent. I really want an English teacher somewhere to bring these books into the classroom, because when you start dissecting them from a literary standpoint... it's like falling down a rabbit hole.


----------



## 4eyesbooks (Jan 9, 2012)

Okay....so I just finished the first book and I have to say I'm hooked.  I'm ready to read the second one and find out what happens Katniss, Peeta, Gale and Prim...I HAVE TO KNOW!


----------



## M.P. Jones (Dec 28, 2011)

I finished the first book last week..in about three sittings.  I, too, have been wondering when to read the next one.

I think the whole concept is incredibly clever and really resonated with me as a fan of the old Ian Livingstone "choose your own adventure" type D&D books when I was much younger.  The fact that this was children made it all the more shocking of course and I think the author was brilliant at pulling no punches at all throughout the book.  You just knew that bad things were going to happen but you just had to read on.

Having said that, the general impression was that this was pulp fiction, in the sense that it was sensationalist stuff, aimed at grabbing a wide audience without being too focused on pure literary merit.  I can't blame the author for that and perhaps it wouldn't have worked any other way.  Personally, I could have done with more depth.

I am never a fan of present tense narratives, but at least it was first person and not third person - I find those unreadable - an it did keep the tempo up nicely.

I am intrigued to read here about a movie.  I am not sure I could watch such graphic scenes, as a parent, but it would be interesting to see how it is all done...

MP Jones


----------

