• Like Us On Facebook
    • Like us on Facebook

  • +1 Us on Google
  • Follow Us On Facebook
  • Follow Us On Facebook
    • Follow us on tumblr.

  • Search

Fandoms collide! In a new interview with the New York Times, Fun. singer Nate Ruess reveals he’s reading The Hunger Games.

He goes on to say that Fun. bassist Nate Harold isn’t a fan of the movie. From the NYT:

I picked up “The Hunger Games” thinking it was written at my regressed reading level. I’ve spent hours reading it, and I’m not even halfway through. Our bass player, whose name is also Nate, ended up reading all three novels and loved them. He was really underwhelmed by the movie. He was upset that they focused more on the killing than the government control, political aspect of it. What’s most appealing to me about the book is that I’m not going to finish it.

We hadn’t thought the film focused less on the government control – that theme seemed evident throughout the film! What do you think?

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=531808242 Courtney Gibson

    What movie did he see? I thought the film focused completely on the control! If it had been in katniss’s point of view you wouldn’t have see all of that.

    • http://twitter.com/HungerGames4all Rae

      Exactly! He must have confused this with some other movie! The main aspect of this movie had to do with government control, that’s why we had all those added scenes with Seneca and Snow! Earlier, we had people complaining how there wasn’t enough violence, and now there is too much??!! What is this?!

    • 7Starrchasers

      So true…I actually thought it focused less on the games and more of the politics behind it…which is what I loved…silly goose Nate!

  • HungerPotterFan

    Boo! I don’t like them anymore. 

  • Zine

    He doesn’t know what he’s talking about lol

  • Sapph

    We need a word to insult these people, just like we did in Harry Potter calling them muggles. 

    • goldensnidget

      The Capitols…? Or Capitol citizens…. hmm, not really sure. But that’s a good point.

      Ooh! Careers?

      • Sapph

        Hahaha, those stupid careers. Capitol citizens it’s also ok! But, how we call ourselves? 

        • Hermione A

          The mockingjays.

          • sab

            the capies ?

          • Hermione a

            We would call ourselves the capies?

    • LilyLuna

      Silly muggle, that only works with Potter. :p

      Lol, kidding. I like the idea of calling them careers, I don’t think it’ll pick up though. We fans don’t even know what to call *ourselves* yet.

      • .

        call your selves the hungerests :P not much else u could say

  • Joe

    I expected this to be another article about the shaky camera, the pacing or the little details that didn’t stay true to the book, but I completely disagree with this opinion. The movie took out many of the killings to make it suitable for younger viewers and added scenes about government control like the clip at the reaping and the conversations between Seneca and President now. If anything the movie did the opposite of what he said.

  • http://twitter.com/sahina91 Sahina =D

    i still haven’t finished the book and i started months ago.

  • Luna

    ” What’s most appealing to me about the book is that I’m not going to finish it.” This made me laugh so hard =D and the movie was brilliant in my opinion and they showed government control throughout the movie pfft whatcha talkin bout?

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Maria-Wang/542480760 Maria Wang

      seneca and snow scenes are one example. Some people actually didn’t like that!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_XKZIG7MXV2IMZZ3JDKGSNMJ2RE Chris

    Wow. I liked the movie but it’s actually refreshing to see someone famous not say the same old “Oh, yeah, I loved it!” haha

  • hpatdh33

    If anything the movie had more government control then the first book.  The books really explained it more in catching fire and mocking jay.  But the riot and the scenes with President Snow were great!

  • Vala

    I don’t agree with him, I think the movie focused a lot on the government control, more than the first book did actually. But what does bother me a lot and I’ve noticed in the media lately is whenever there’s an interview with one of the kids who played a career tribute they’re usually asked how it was to play a villain. Now that I think is just a bad portrayal of the film in the media and it bothers me a lot cause, yes they’re killing kids, but so are Katniss and Peeta (well he didn’t in the film, at least not on purpose, but he did in the book) , and let’s not forget that they pretty much don’t have any other choice, so how does this make them the villains? Just really bothers me, because they are kids and I think the media is more focused on the killing part and the love triangle part and the message kinda gets lost in translations somewhere… does that make them the capitol?

    • Joe

      I see your point about the career tributes, but the book took place from the point of Katniss and in her eyes they were villains also. They even enjoyed killing the other tributes. That’s just sick! But, I also think that Snow and the government of Panem are bigger villains. It’s sort of like in Harry Potter; Voldemort is the main antagonist, but Malfoy is also a villain to Harry (atleast for the majority of the time).

  • http://twitter.com/greeneggsplusam Sam

    I thought the entire thing was on the government and there was barely ANY killing!

  • Hp78741

    I enjoyed the movie immensely. Although i do not agree with the bassist on the government control, i did feel an emptiness after i had watched the movie: like it was missing something. But i loved it though otherwise. 

  • Aeo2626

    Who are these people?  Never heard of them.

    • *sneeze*

      “TONIIIGHT WE ARE YOOUNG” Does that song ring a bell? It’s by the band Fun. ;).

  • Plat

    I think: Who cares about a retarded band’s opinion/sinicalness?  ;)

  • http://twitter.com/aadnama Amanda Douglas

    You know, I really love fun., but this just blows my mind. What movie did he see? The movie actually focused more on the political aspect, and less on the killing aspect. I’m assuming he slept through the added scenes? That’s the only reason I can come up with for this to make any sense.

  • Sarah

    I felt like the books become more political as you go along. The movie didn’t need to necessarily focus heavily on that like the later movies will need to because the books progressively  gain political momentum.  

  • DreamNox58

    I never thought about this until now and I’m undecided.  I think it should have focused more on the games but also more on the way the capitol works and all that.  Maybe the movie should have been a bit longer?

  • http://www.facebook.com/mufflednoise Abby Reyes

    The political aspect of it isn’t evident in book 1, and I think the government control part was very evident in the movies with the added scenes. Not really sure what he’s talking about, but to each his own I guess.

  • Samuel

    I think the film showed more of the political aspect than the book to be honest. 

Hypable encourages the community to use our Comments feature to hold thoughtful, polite, and critical discussions. We do NOT tolerate inappropriate, rude, or downright mean discussion towards the news story's subject matter or towards other Hypable users. We reserve the right to delete or ban comments and users who violate these guidelines.