Hunger Games: L'embrasement

From the acting to the sets to the special effects, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire is an exceptional film. This movie is long, but it doesn't feel watered down or stretched out - there is plenty of story and action to fill the time. Plus, Jennifer Lawrence doesn't have to carry the movie on her own. The supporting cast does an excellent job, as well. This film can't really stand on its own, but it's still a fun ride and a well-done adaptation of the book.

We are now at the post Twilight/Harry Potter era, and The Hunger Games movies are the only young adult novel adaptations that have the same scale of fame of the two former series. And you know that the YA genre has become even worse nowadays; just pick up a random book, mix them with familiar elements that would please teenager hormones, and good to go. But Catching Fire is obviously different, and these are the reasons why it's much superior compared to those horrible drecks: it has strong ambition, it digs deeper within its themes, and simply tells a story. Thus it finally gets it right by deliberately showed all the interesting parts of the source material.

Everyone will most likely come for the action and the romance, but unlike the last film, this one has a wiser focus: sociopolitical satires. It explores how tyrannical the Capitol government is, and how the media amazingly helps covering their corruption. The context alone is of course immediately compelling, it makes a stirring conviction why they really need to go for a revolution. While it centers Katniss who has issues of her own, her compassion towards her family, friends, and the people of Panem has always felt genuine. Those kinds of emotions work remarkably than the love triangle she's stuck into.

The film once again benefits having Jennifer Lawrence in the lead. She's just incredibly engaging, that you would definitely root for all throughout. The rest of the cast remains as compelling as they were, same goes to the new ones somewhat. Francis Lawrence now handles the series. The camera may be less shaky, but there's always a sense of art in his direction, especially at the midst of silence. The pacing is effortlessly outstanding, which decently balances the drama and the thrills. The games has become a lot electrifying, it is more practical and have greater effect of danger than just characters trying to kill each other. It's a creative turn that goes full momentous until the end. The production and the effects are solid enough to make the exteriors of their world look intriguing.

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire has a smarter vision and finally hits the right note. The first movie was entertaining, but it hardly bothers showing the actual point of these stories other than enjoying how the games were played. This sequel filled the blanks around the setting thus tells a far more interesting story. And it sure feels like an utter miracle for an awful year for YA films, then again a great young adult book adaptations have always been rare. Overall, it's easily the best one this year, and that is all what you need to know for a while since it's kind of hard talking about it without giving much away. I can't say it's flawless, but it is generally engrossing.

I must say, I was worried about this one. Catching Fire is my favorite book of the trilogy, but cinematically it makes absolutely no sense. The Hunger Games reads like a screenplay--Catching Fire is a meandery epic full of worldbuilding and exposition for a war that won't even begin until Mockingjay. So I was pleasantly surprised to find that this installment of the hit franchise, directed by industry rookie Francis Lawrence, was maybe even more engaging than its predecessor.

Visually, it is a feat. The attention to detail is remarkable. Lawrence, along with screenwriters Michael Hardt and Suzanne Collins herself, manages to weave in all of the necessary set up to the upcoming war against The Capitol without it feeling tedious or heavy-handed. The new additions to the cast, most notably Philip Seymor Hoffman's Plutarch Heavensbee and Sam Claflin's Finnick O'Dair, are excellent, and the dialogue is much less wooden than, forgive me, the dialogue in the books sometimes is. Moreover, it is impressive that even with so many new people and so many moving parts, the central thread of Rebellion shines through.

Of course, with so much plot, so much to set up, one can hardly blame Catching Fire for falling short in the emotional department--as is, it clocks in at 2 hours and 26 minutes--but I did find myself wanting some steamier Peeta/Katniss action. I was disappointed by Lawrence's apparent disregard for the relationship between Katniss (Jennifer Lawrence, no relation) and Peeta (the incomparable Josh Hutcherson). To me, Catching Fire is about Peeta. It's the Peeta show.

Here's the thing: Katniss is supposed to be conflicted, not indifferent about Peeta. In the paper version, the reader, and by extension Katniss herself, feels truly torn between Gale and Peeta. She can't help but slowly fall in love with Peeta, who is so charming and funny and relentlessly Good. In this iteration, Katniss and Peeta have little to no chemistry, and Peeta only speaks when it is necessary to move the plot forward. Gale, on the other hand, is 6'4 and literally a Hemsworth. That he is a Hemsworth is no one's fault, I guess, but maybe Peeta should have been allowed to say some of the cute stuff he says in the books.

The "adults" in the cast--Woody Harrelson's Haymitch and Donald Sutherland's President Snow have much meatier roles than they do in the books. To their credit, they are fantastic. But I can't help but wonder how much more potent this movie could have been if Lawrence had trusted his young stars a bit more with the emotional heavy lifting.

Though it fell a bit short of exceptional, Catching Fire is by no means a Sophomore Slump, and I look forward to watching Mockingjay Part 1 on the big screen when it comes out!

Ever since I first saw it in theaters, Catching Fire has been one of my favorite movies of all time. It's so much better than the first one. It explores the story's political conflict more deeply and greatly expands on the dystopian universe.

The new director gives it a fresh and improved vision. The first one had audiences criticizing the shaky and desaturated camerawork and this sequel fixed it. Even though one this movie involves Katniss and Peeta competing in the games again, it never feels like a repeat of the first one. They understand that viewers already know how the games work and take advantage of the chance to explore new concepts with it.

Catching Fire should be an example to all filmmakers of how to do a good sequel.

An earlier reviewer compared this to the Japanese cult favorite Battle Royale and decided it was almost junk. I beg to differ - the film needs to be evaluated on its own merits and its own story. Battle Royale is a single story about merciless, wanton and senseless violence and depravity when the aim was simply to be the last to survive - a kill- fest, where the innovative ways of killing serve to shock and titillate the audience but do little for the plot. The Hunger Games however, is about oppression, fighting back and revolution. The Games, though pivotal, are still part of a larger story.

Compared to the first film, this one is definitely darker. The characters look even more despondent than ever, and if you thought there were few laughs in the first film, there is practically none in this. Even the brightly-lit scenes featuring cheering crowds and smiling hosts seemed dim, bleak and depressing. While enjoying the witty banter, you couldn't help but wait for the 'but...'. The feeling of doom and gloom persists from the start to the end of the film. It is not a bad thing though - it is not supposed to be a happy movie.

Many details and subplots were understandably cut from the film adaptation, but none that were critical to the plot of the film. However, a lot of the peripheral action that were in the book is missing here, hence, though the story moves quickly enough, there is always the feeling that for an action-thriller, there aren't enough fights or explosions. The ones they movie do have aren't exciting or grand enough.

But in terms of story-telling, the movie still works to move from the first film and prepare for the third. The seeds of revolution have been planted and watered, and we now prepare for the maturing and harvesting.

Jennifer Lawrence didn't do as well here as in the last film, probably because most of the growing needed has been done previously. Josh Hutcherson though, put in a better performance. While he may previously be the injured lovestruck puppy dog, his maturing into a more complex character in this movie means he starts carrying more of the film.

Emotionally, this movie affected me less than the last one. Maybe it's partly because I know what is coming, but that accounts for a very minor percentage. Mostly it's because the film is unable to engage your baser emotions - nothing that truly tugs at your heartstrings. The pervading gloom also seems to have sapped any ability to feel more despondent than you think you already are.

It is still a movie that can be enjoyed though, and I did enjoy it enough. Hopefully the next film will provide for more emotional variance. If you don't feel for the characters, you won't care about the film.