gale

Estimated Reading Time: 3min

A girl on fire, a mocking jay, and a world that is just bat crap crazy upside down bananas!

Hunger games was a corker when it came out, and even more so when the movies graced our screen in the YA movie era of fame and acclaim. So, when I went back to read the books for the first time in 2021, the craze was well and truly passed.

But, something that people have been debating since the book, and subsequently the movie, came out, is whether Katniss should have ended up with Peeta or Gale, and now that I’ve seen the movie AND read the book, I’m weighing in on this classic debate!

I haven’t looked into what ANYONE has said on this topic, I’m just going off my own observations, so here we go:

Pros – Katniss has known Gale for a long time, and in a personal way (not just from afar and once when he threw some food scraps her way). They’ve been hunting partners a while, know each other well and already have some sizzle from the start of where we pick up the books/movies. Gale would protect Katniss no matter what – he’d go down swinging and never hesitate. He’s a warrior who is all in.

Cons – Gale can be very one minded/focussed. He hates the world they live in, and is so desperate to change it, that he rushes into alliances which might actually not be positive, or provide good results. If he thinks something is the right way to go, he doesn’t support anyone else (ie Katniss), and thinks he’s got things sorted out. Gale loves Katniss, but in a way that seems to be conditional.

PEETA

Pros – Peeta and Katniss bond over the horrors of the games, and this is a strong bond. Peeta has cared for Katniss in some way or another for a long while (from afar), and showed compassion to her in a low moment by providing her with bread when she needed it (at personal risk mind you). He has a caring heart, and is compassionate while also being strong of heart. He can also throw some heavy stuff around, which would come in really handy around the house (ladies, am I right?!).

Cons – Peeta is a bit of a weenie. Let’s not shy away from it. He gets more courageous as the story moves forward, but he’s still a bit of a sooky la la. Bonds from trials and chaos don’t always last when it all dies down and normal life sets in. You can’t base a real relationship on something as fleeting as danger – especially when that won’t be a constant – something about Peeta and Katniss feels like this. When the wars are over, and things are “normal” and they do life like everyone else, they (particularly Katniss) will be bored with their lives, and eventually each other. Peeta is also a secret manipulator. In the first Hunger Games, we see him using their relationship to stay alive, and hide things from not only Katniss, but the viewers. It wouldn’t be too hard for him to translate this into a home situation when he really wanted something.

Okay, that’s my brief pros and cons of each guy, so what’s the verdict?

I think Katniss should have ended up with Peeta. I think Gale was a little too set on overthrowing the regime, and righting all the wrongs (either real, or imagined by him) at any cost. Peeta seemed to have Katniss in mind when he faces whatever it is that he’s got in front of him. His compassionate and kind nature gives him an edge for me, because that’s what allows a person (particularly a man) to be a good leader, and a good partner. It allows strength, because you have the ability, and aren’t afraid to show these important qualities.

So, do you agree with my decision? Share in the comments if you do, or don’t and why! I’d love to hear your thoughts.

See You in The Adventures!
Christy Grace

Kids fighting to the death to be the ultimate victor and live in luxury… Okay, it wasn’t my first choice in reading material when The Hunger Games came out!

Estimated Reading Time: 5min

Okay, so I finally did it. I read The Hunger Games. I actually watched the movie years ago, not long after it came out. At the time, I wasn’t particularly interested in a story about kids being forced to fight to the death in an arena. It sounded awful, and not in a way that made me want to watch it. Now, almost a decade later, I’ve finally picked up the book and decided it was time to compare the two.

As always, there will be spoilers ahead.

The Main Story Stayed Intact

One thing the movie did well was sticking to the core plot. The major story beats are all there, and I was actually surprised by some of the smaller details that made it into the film. Things like Prim’s cat and Katniss’s dislike of it only take a few seconds of screen time, but they were included nonetheless.

At the same time, the movie removed a lot from the book, and that’s understandable. Films have time limits. Condensing material is part of adapting a novel. The problem wasn’t necessarily that things were cut. It was what was cut.

The Pacing Felt Backwards

One of my biggest complaints about the movie was the pacing. It felt like the first half of the film focused heavily on the lead-up to the Games, while the second half rushed through the Games themselves.

If anything needed condensing, I think it should have been some of those earlier scenes. By spending more time in the arena, the film could have explored the survival aspect much more effectively.

In the book, the Games feel brutal. You see the effects of starvation, dehydration, injury, exhaustion, and the constant threat of death. The physical and emotional toll is impossible to ignore. The movie touched on those elements, but often moved past them so quickly that much of their impact was lost.

The Missing Character Moments

The biggest casualty of the adaptation wasn’t the plot. It was the character development.

Throughout the book there are countless small interactions that build relationships and motivations. Many of these moments never made it into the film. In particular, the dynamic between Katniss and Peeta suffered.

The movie includes the broad strokes of their story, but it removes many of the moments that make their partnership believable. Because of that, the “star-crossed lovers” strategy never felt as convincing on screen as it did in the novel.

Without those quieter scenes, it becomes harder to understand why certain choices matter later.

The Characters Lost Some of Their Personality

Another issue was how the characters came across. Book Katniss felt sharper and more observant. Her relationship with Gale felt more balanced and established. Peeta, meanwhile, came across as significantly kinder and gentler in the novel.

One example that stood out was when Katniss sees Peeta with the Career Tributes. In the book, there’s uncertainty about what he’s doing and why. In the movie, some of that ambiguity disappears, making him seem more focused on self-preservation than he actually is. The result is that many of the nuances of his character get lost. He’s still recognisably Peeta, but not quite the same Peeta.

Where the Movie Worked Better

To be fair, there were moments where the movie had an advantage. The Reaping is a great example. When I read Katniss volunteering for Prim in the book, it was emotional. Watching it happen on screen was even more powerful. Seeing Prim’s fear, hearing the silence of the crowd, and watching Katniss step forward created an emotional weight that hit much harder visually. Film can sometimes communicate emotion instantly in a way that books can’t, and this was one of those moments.

The Ending Lost Some Impact

One of the areas where I felt the adaptation struggled most was the aftermath of the Games. The movie moves through these scenes very quickly. In the book, however, there is far more tension and uncertainty. Katniss is separated from Peeta, unsure whether he will survive, and the emotional fallout is given room to breathe. These moments also help establish how Katniss’s feelings toward Peeta are changing.

By the end of the movie, I felt like she seemed almost indifferent to him. In the book, that simply isn’t the case. Her feelings are complicated, but there is already genuine care there. Losing those scenes weakens the emotional payoff.

Book vs Movie: Which Was Better?

If you couldn’t tell by now, I preferred the book. The pacing felt stronger, the characters had more personality, and the emotional moments landed more effectively because they had room to develop.

The movie isn’t a bad adaptation. It follows the main plot closely and includes more details than I expected. But for me, the emphasis was in the wrong places. Rather than cutting some of the setup and spending more time on character relationships and the reality of surviving the Games, the film often rushed through the moments that mattered most.

As with most book-to-movie adaptations, the book simply had more space to explore its world and characters. And in The Hunger Games, that extra space made all the difference.

Grab the book Here

Have you read the book and seen the movie? Which version did you prefer?

See You in The Adventures!
Christy Grace