Here at Tomestone, as you could probably tell, we pride ourselves on advocating for social diversity. Whether it be animal domination, advocating for totalitarianism, or exposing young adult fiction novels, we are the first news source to report on the issues that matter. When we heard there was a movie with a shocking 4 minority characters and a half female cast only because it was written into the movie’s rules, we had to write about it.
Never has a movie championed such social progressiveness as The Hunger Games, originally written by Suzanne Collins. Since the two are interchangeable examples of white supremacy, both will be reviewed together as one. There can only be one victor, except when emo white girls are involved.
The main characters Katniss and Peta live in the terrible future where Hollywood directors still do not include diversity into their films. The Hunger Games by extension is a remarkable example of symmetry: the four black characters are either the same job in the District 12 like Cinna and Portia, or are the two tributes from the same city, because minorities only exist in District 11 in the future.
There can only be one victor, except when emo white girls are involved.
At the same time, perfect diversity is almost impossible. While The Hunger Games does a lot of things right, there’s two glaring areas in which Collins lacks her trademarked inclusiveness. First off, creating a game in which the majority of participants are white and fight to the death certainly constitutes the future’s equivalent of the present’s white genocide.
This arena in which mostly white children fight to the death acts as a slaughtering of one of history’s most oppressed people: straight white men. It’s unsurprising that discrimination still exists in the future, and it’s saddening that most of the burden of this discrimination falls upon the oppressors. After all, if this future exists with almost no racial sexual or gender minorities, they’re probably off at the farm where my dog Sparky went, right?
Likewise, did anybody else notice how offputtingly young the participants in the games are? The competition draws only from adolescents or teenagers to murder each other, and something about this seemed bizarre. Not that there’s anything wrong with killing people for sport, but more so that the age distribution should strive for a wider variety.
The only exception comes of course in Season 2: Kim and Courtney Take Panem, where the gang of winners old and new are senselessly hacked down regardless of age. The image of Mags running headfirst into poisonous gas or Wireress getting her throat slit by one of the other tributes signifies the importance of avoiding ageism, or the discrimination against people because of their maturity.
The idea of the future is a scary one. In the year 3000 Apple will most likely be releasing the iPhone 1007S, a paper-thin sheet of Plexiglas that breaks if you breathe too hard on it and costs $10,000. Despite this, it’s good to know it will be a future where white people still dominate the media and where having a pale straight girl braid her hair and kill people still constitutes feminism. If we could achieve The Hunger Games’ perfect diversity (i.e. no diversity) and eliminate these games that oppress young white people, this would be an easy 10/10. However, since these systemic national issues still exist, THG will have to be knocked down to just a 9.5/10, a 6/10 raw score with a +3.5/10 for white privilege.
Alex has an honorary doctorate from the Kim Dan Institute of Higher Learning in Book Reviews. He is also working on becoming ordained as a minister online.