Death Match: "Hunger Games" vs. "Twilight"

The past few years I have been well-aware that my days in the nation’s key marketing demographic are over. When I turn on an episode of my once-beloved “Real World Road Rules Challenges,” the faces are now all of gym-toned strangers, not friends. Ten years ago I at least knew what Britney Spears’ songs were (in part because MTV still played videos), but the thought of the Jonas Brothers, Miley Cyrus et. al fill me with a vague repugnance, even though they are no more evil than David Cassidy or Annette Funicello were in their own time. But the biggest sign that the ol’ gray mare ain’t what she used to be is my indifference to the “Twilight” franchise.

I don’t know why I was so adverse to reading them; my sister had read all four and friends (or at least people I know on Facebook) extolled their virtues (e.g., girliwenttohighschoolwith is hoping the kids take a long nap today. I want to finish “Breaking Dawn!”). But for whatever reason, I resisted (but not before asking someone last summer how the last book ended; in hindsight, maybe that scratched the itch).

But a couple of weeks ago I was leaving Jewel and the Red Box beckoned me with its promise of easy entertainment for only a dollar and before I knew what was happening, I was throwing the DVD case into my recycled-plastic bag (I’m not a monster). And later that afternoon, when I started watching it, I was filled with that same giddy feeling I used to get in sixth grade when we had somehow -inexplicably and against all odds – gotten one of the new releases from the video store. I don’t know how to put it into words, but it was the same mildly euphoric sensation I had when I watched “Adventures in Babysitting” for the first time. But like any drug, the hit was momentary and by the end of the movie I was bored and conscious that all of its technical skill was just masking a crummy story.

I say all of this because I subsequently got annoyed that all of these young readers (and maybe the books are FANTASTIC; I haven’t read them) had gotten jazzed up over such a mediocre tale. I mean, aren’t vampire stories supposed to have violence? Action? Characters that you care about? Especially because I had spent two semi-sleepless nights reading a genuinely unnerving Young Adult novel, “The Hunger Games.”

“The Hunger Games” takes place in America in the distant future, except that civil war and massive famine have caused the country to be restructured in thirteen districts. As a result, the government requires each district to send two representatives (selected via lottery) to take place in a “Battle Royale” fight to the death that is subsequently televised. The whole thing is broadcast continuously to the nation, serving as a hodge-podge of “Survivor,” “Miss America,” and the Oscars. Rather than give you a blow-by-blow account of what this book is about, I will instead offer this brief list of why it is a better reading choice than “Twilight,” especially for the young women in your life.

• Katniss, the main character, is a bad-ass with a bow and arrow. If a coven of vampires tried to lure her into an abandoned dance studio, she wouldn’t just wander in – she’d have scoped the whole place out the previous twenty-four hours, crouched high in a tree, and then have unloaded bloody hell on them all.
• Remember how I said how Twilight has no action, violence, or characters you care about? That’s because when Stephanie Meyer went to the suspense bank, the teller said, "Oh, sorry, Suzanne Collins just took out a massive withdrawal." Collins allows you to get to know the characters, relate to them, care for them, and then remind you that they are either going to have to kill everyone else or be killed themselves. And she kills off important people! Not just some old guy who might as well have the word"disposable plot device" flashing above his head when he walks on-screen (again, maybe in the book his death was heart-rending. I am a philistine and only watched the movie).
• She deals with teenage chastity in a realistic way. I had read abunch of arguments that "Twilight" was just abstinence-only claptrap glossed up in gothic romance. I don't know if I buy that but I did remember thinking "BORING" during any and all of the Pattinson/Stewart scenes (except the one where he gave her a piggyback ride and Roadrunnered up the mountain. That should have been an eight minute round-the-world montage, in my opinion). While both stories take place in out-of-the-ordinary circumstances, Collins at least has the grace to give Katniss more sophisticated emotions than "Why is he being so mean to me? Argh!" Any relationship Katniss chooses to have would complicate/endanger her life back home. Since she has been stuck in survival mode for so long, her romantic longings seem more like the blossomings they are meant to be, unlike Bella's "somebody thinks I'm special?" sniveling.

In all, "Hunger Games" kicks ass. I hope all the seventh grade girls who have been heaving around Stephanie Meyers oeuvre for the past few years give it a chance. We'll probably see a lot less "Team Edward" t-shirts, and a lot more ladies on the archery course.