Many books-turned-films tried to copy the success of the ‘Harry Potter’ franchise, from ‘Eragon’ to ‘The Seeker’ to ‘Percy Jackson and the Olympians’, but the only one close enough has been ‘Twilight’. Thankfully ‘The Hunger Games’, based on the first book in author Suzanne Collins’ bestselling trilogy, is a well-crafted and competent adaptation. The entire film pulsates with constant suspense, exciting thrills, and effective emotion brought upon mostly by the talented Jennifer Lawrence, who never seems to disappoint in any film she’s in. Fans of ‘The Hunger Games’ trilogy can relax and enjoy the faithful ride director Gary Ross (‘Seabiscuit’) takes us with the first installment in the sure-to-be hit franchise.

The film opens with many wide shots showcasing a dreary setting full of depressing individuals and a grim tone, a la Dorothy Lang’s Depression-era photos. This is District 12, one of the poorest of all the districts in the nation of Panem, a post-apocalyptic country that rose from the ashes of what used to be the United States of America. Panem is ruled by the wealthy Capitol, which hosts an annual competition in which boys and girls age 12-18 from each district are randomly chosen and fight to the death until only one is left standing. The winner is bathed in riches. This is The Hunger Games, which was invented by the Capitol to suppress the districts after they led a big rebellion against the Capitol over 70 years ago, ended up in the destruction of District 13. The annual event is televised everywhere and are a required viewing for all of Panem.

Our heroine is Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence), a bold and strong-willed 16-year-old who reigns from District 12. She spends the majority of her time taking care of younger sister Primrose Everdeen and their mother, mostly from hunting animals in the wild, and along the way Katniss learned how to be a skillful archer. At the Hunger Games “reaping,” the event in which the district children have their names chosen by lottery to be part of the 24 “tributes” in the competition, Katniss volunteers for the games in place of her little sister after Prim’s name is chosen. The other District 12 tribute is Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutcherson), the son of a family of bakers.

The two tributes are accompanied by mentor Haymitch Abernathy (Woody Harrelson), a drunk who also happens to be a District 12 winner from a past Hunger Games, and the flashy Effie Trinket (Elizabeth Banks), who hails from the Capitol and is a chaperone-of-sorts for District 12 tributes. Once Katniss and Peeta arrive at the Capitol, the entire look and feel of the film is changed from melodramatic and bleak to colorful and satirical. This lavish city appears just that, wealthy and filled with gorgeous and polished futuristic architecture. The citizens here are more flamboyant and colorful, but also inhumane, living without a care in the world as they entertain themselves with kids killing one another. Despite its tyrannical nature, the Capitol does have some delightful characters, like Cinna (Lenny Kravitz), Katniss’ stylist for the games, and Caesar Flickerman (Stanley Tucci), the overly cheerful and often amusing blue-haired TV host for the event.

While the beginning of the film is a bit slower and melancholic, and the scenes in the Capitol more amusing and upbeat, it picks up speed once the actual Hunger Games kicks in. This deadly competition takes up about the entire second half of the film and manages to stay exciting the entire time, never dragging one bit. The action is there, the adrenaline is there, and the danger is there, but what could have made ‘The Hunger Games’ much better and more brutal is if it was rated R (though that would have prevented one of the series’ core age groups from seeing it). The film maintains its PG-13 rating by depicting the gruesome killing scenes in fast-cut, shaky sequences that show enough to understand what’s going on, but not too much to where the violence is completely displayed. We see blood, but we don’t see much of the gore and bloodshed. The film is still effective in its depiction of violence, but an R-rated version of ‘The Hunger Games’ could have been a much more effective film.

The film is very faithful to its source novel, which is both a benefit and flaw. Exciting turn of events like the Tracker Jacker bees and the Muttations are kept like in the book, but lesser aspects like Peeta’s uselessness for much of the Hunger Games and offscreen deaths of most of the other tributes are unfortunately still at play. Peeta’s injury in the competition was used to further a possibly blooming romantic relationship with Katniss, and this concept is still maintained on screen, but it’s barely focused on at all in the film. And it would have been nicer to get to know the 22 other tributes a little bit more before most of them were quickly killed in the games. Understanding these characters would have resulted in greater emotional impacts with their deaths. However, the drama and deadliness of the games definitely takes effect in some of the deaths that do occur on screen, most specifically the death of an extremely likable tribute, one that readers of the novel will know what I’m talking about. This death scene in particular is tear-inducing and vey well-executed.

Much of what makes ‘The Hunger Games’ so compelling, besides its cynical premise, is its strong cast. Jennifer Lawrence (‘X-Men: First Class‘) is perfectly casted as the lead, and she expertly conveys her character’s grittiness as well as her vulnerability, something she’s kept since her Oscar-nominated role in ‘Winter’s Bone’. Josh Hutcherson (‘The Kids Are All Right‘) is also great as Peeta, though it’s a shame the film never really focused on the character’s charismatic and comical side. The fantastic Woody Harrelson (‘Zombieland’ & ‘Rampart’) is perfect as the sarcastic and drunken Haymitch. Musician Lenny Kravitz is surprisingly convincing as the fashion genius, Cinna, who is one of the most likable characters in both the novel and the film. Elizabeth Banks’ (‘Man On a Ledge’) turn as the wild and zany Effie is always fun to watch, and Donald Sutherland as the ruthless President Snow is a wise casting decision as Sutherland conveys both his character’s intimidation and mysteriousness. Honestly, ‘The Hunger Games’ is one of the best-casted films when it comes to adaptations of popular novels. Every single actor in the film is perfect for their role and I can’t think of a replacement for any of the characters.

One of the only major flaws of the film is due to its faithfulness to the source. The ending of the novel is not really a conclusion to the story and is instead more of a cliffhanger leading to the sequel, ‘Catching Fire’. The film keeps this frustrating ending and leaves you wanting more. But then again, this may be also be a good thing because it shows just how great the film is. Another minor flaw is the film’s lack of actual “hunger” when it comes to the characters in the competition. The novel features Katniss and Peeta undergoing starvation countless times, yet the film barely touches this at all. It’s strange, especially considering the title. Also, some instances where the shaky camerawork is being used are a little bit too much, especially in the beginning of the film and in parts of the actual competition.

‘The Hunger Games’ is an honest adaptation of its original source material and has been translated extremely well onto the big screen (it probably helps that the series’ original author wrote the first draft of the script). The franchise is in good hands with director Gary Ross, who is planning on directing the sequel, ‘Catching Fire’, with the script written by Simon Beaufoy (‘Slumdog Millionaire‘ & ‘127 Hours‘). This film will (deservingly) be one of the biggest films of the year, even if it isn’t exactly entirely original; there are some films that have tackled similar issues with a similar premise, most notably Japan’s ‘Battle Royale’, and even real-life events like the Colosseum battles in Rome. ‘The Hunger Games’ is still a wildly entertaining film with a bright future ahead of it. The odds are definitely in its favor as long as the filmmakers stray away from moody and cheesiness that overtakes the ‘Twilight’ films. This is not the new ‘Twilight’. No, this is the new ‘Harry Potter’, a worthy successor.