The Hunger Games (film)
- Thread starter Elisa Maza
- Start date
Lex
Administrator
Oh yeah I was gonna post here after I saw it yesterday at 12:01am (lol) but I couldn't find the thread/ was too lazy to do a search so I kinda meh'd out.
It was pretty good, very true to the source material etc. but these movies generally have been. Super impressed by Coin. It felt a bit shorter and I could have done without the half hour of
but that might just be me complaining because it's the equivalent of like two pages in the book. I guess they had to bump up the screentime somewhere to justify the two parter thing. It wasn't boring, I just don't think that particular segment added anything valuable to the movie.
It was pretty good, very true to the source material etc. but these movies generally have been. Super impressed by Coin. It felt a bit shorter and I could have done without the half hour of
the infiltration mission to save Joanna, Peeta and Annie
X-SOLDIER
Harbinger O Great Justice
- AKA
- X
I totally agree with your assessment, Lex (though I haven't read the books). I think it seems like it could've worked as a single film, though I suppose that really comes down to how much the second part has in it.
Also, apparently this is a thing where life unfortunately imitates art in strange ways: http://io9.com/bangkok-wont-show-mockingjay-after-protestors-use-katni-1661485528
X
Also, apparently this is a thing where life unfortunately imitates art in strange ways: http://io9.com/bangkok-wont-show-mockingjay-after-protestors-use-katni-1661485528
X
Lex
Administrator
I can see this going the way of Harry Potter tbh. The first half is kind of subdued and less flashy, the second part is just constant action. To be fair Deathly Hallows part 1 was kind of mocked because people thought it was boring but it's my favourite of all the Harry Potter movies by a long long long way.
Anyway sidestory there
Yeah this seems very similar, and that's what I expected because that's also how the book is structured. The first 80% is slow nothing, the last 20% is bam bam bam bam bam. But honestly I thought they'd at least get
in before the end of part 1 to at least give it a bit more action. I mean it wasn't without action, but I think everyone would agree that it feels quite small compared to the first two.
Idk, I'm still not convinced they needed to split them. The other movies have been close to 3 hours in length so what was stopping them from doing that again instead of having this one be 90 minutes and the next one possibly the same length (money). Then again I did eat my words when I watched Deathly Hallows because thematically all that shit just doesn't fit in the same movie.
I'm not going to talk about the Mockingjay ending for obvious reasons, but I will say I'm looking forward to seeing how people are going to react. lololololol
Anyway sidestory there
Yeah this seems very similar, and that's what I expected because that's also how the book is structured. The first 80% is slow nothing, the last 20% is bam bam bam bam bam. But honestly I thought they'd at least get
the infiltration of District 2
Idk, I'm still not convinced they needed to split them. The other movies have been close to 3 hours in length so what was stopping them from doing that again instead of having this one be 90 minutes and the next one possibly the same length (money). Then again I did eat my words when I watched Deathly Hallows because thematically all that shit just doesn't fit in the same movie.
I'm not going to talk about the Mockingjay ending for obvious reasons, but I will say I'm looking forward to seeing how people are going to react. lololololol
The Twilight Mexican
Ex-SeeD-ingly good
- AKA
- TresDias
So, I finally got around to seeing this. It was an excellent adaptation, and I'm apparently one of the few who feels splitting the third book into two was entirely justified.
I can point to numerous reasons for this:
1) Would you prefer they just gloss over stuff like the ruins of District 12 or take some time to let it sink in for the viewer and build the characters with it too?
2) Atmosphere. This ties into the above point as well. Did they need to rush by whatever opportunities for quieter outside filming they had, keeping us underground until the
segments we'll get in the next movie?
3) We needed to see more than just what Katniss sees. This adds content (thus, consuming film time) -- both the exploration of other characters and the opportunity for sequences of tension. The latter is why we got a long sequence for the raid on the Tribute Center versus the couple of pages from the book. It was a big deal even there, but not something Katniss was present for, so we got no details. This works way better cinematically than just a couple of scenes with Katniss stressing.
Especially with "Mockingjay" and all that it has going on -- the uprisings, the host of new characters, the numerous plot threads -- it would have hurt the movie to not give so much time to the scenes Katniss isn't present for. Shit, even as it is, Peeta and Haymitch were still almost cameos.
I could keep going, but I think I've made my point.
Long story short, though: You would not have gotten a good movie out of this if it weren't split up.
My only real surprise was that the credits didn't roll right when
I guess they didn't want to leave anyone confused about what had went down, but I think that would have been a better place to end. Still, it was only a few more minutes, and they do serve a purpose.
By the way, Lex, this movie was 123 minutes, not 90. =P The first was 142 and the second was 146, so it's not like this was that much shorter.
I can point to numerous reasons for this:
1) Would you prefer they just gloss over stuff like the ruins of District 12 or take some time to let it sink in for the viewer and build the characters with it too?
2) Atmosphere. This ties into the above point as well. Did they need to rush by whatever opportunities for quieter outside filming they had, keeping us underground until the
mountain and urban warfare
3) We needed to see more than just what Katniss sees. This adds content (thus, consuming film time) -- both the exploration of other characters and the opportunity for sequences of tension. The latter is why we got a long sequence for the raid on the Tribute Center versus the couple of pages from the book. It was a big deal even there, but not something Katniss was present for, so we got no details. This works way better cinematically than just a couple of scenes with Katniss stressing.
Especially with "Mockingjay" and all that it has going on -- the uprisings, the host of new characters, the numerous plot threads -- it would have hurt the movie to not give so much time to the scenes Katniss isn't present for. Shit, even as it is, Peeta and Haymitch were still almost cameos.
I could keep going, but I think I've made my point.
Long story short, though: You would not have gotten a good movie out of this if it weren't split up.My only real surprise was that the credits didn't roll right when
Boggs knocked Peeta out.
By the way, Lex, this movie was 123 minutes, not 90. =P The first was 142 and the second was 146, so it's not like this was that much shorter.
Last edited:
Ami
Playing All The Stuff!
- AKA
- Amizon, Commander Shepard, Ellie, Rinoa Heartilly, Xena, Clara Oswald, Gamora, Lana Kane, Tifa Lockhart, Jodie Holmes, Chloe Price.
Well done, Sherlock.
It also makes me wonder if it was done deliberately to get people talking or if it was purely an innocent mistake.
The Twilight Mexican
Ex-SeeD-ingly good
- AKA
- TresDias
"Cuntil"?
Kuroto
Pro Adventurer
I just came home from the cinema and thought I should write something about the Mockingjay part 2. To be honest I have forgotten most of what happened in the previous movie and actually had to read my post about the last movie to remind myself. 
I have to say the same thing as last time; I'm surprised how well they managed to adapt the book on the screen. It's been quite a long time since I read the last book so I'm not too sure how loyal the film was to the original text, but for what I remember it was. I wouldn't have even blamed them for changing things since the last part of the trilogy is bad, but they didn't and it worked surprisingly well. I even cried a few times!
I have to say that there are a few things that gave me mixed feelings.
I might complain a little but those were pretty minor things. In the end I did enjoy the film more than the book. As I've seen all the movies now, I think it's safe to say that the second film is the best. It's still a really good franchise over all and all the credit for these people for making an excellent job making two good movies out of one very disappointing book.
P.S. I have to applaud Donald Sutherland again. He's truly a great actor.
P.P.S. If there is one thing you should prepare for before going to see this movie I have two words for you: jump scares. Yes. There is at least one part in the film where there are so many bloody jump scares (or at least anticipation for them) that you feel like you are watching a horror film.
I have to say the same thing as last time; I'm surprised how well they managed to adapt the book on the screen. It's been quite a long time since I read the last book so I'm not too sure how loyal the film was to the original text, but for what I remember it was. I wouldn't have even blamed them for changing things since the last part of the trilogy is bad, but they didn't and it worked surprisingly well. I even cried a few times!
I have to say that there are a few things that gave me mixed feelings.
First is the fact that in the movie Katniss spends less time being messed up by everything. In a way it is good, because there was a bit too much of it in the book. However a part of me wished that there would have been a bit more of it in the movie. As it is the movie doesn't really show that much how all of the things that happen affects Katniss. A tiny bit more of messed up Katniss would have been better.
Another thing I'd like to mention is the deaths. In the movie they are much more effective than in the book, but the fact that I was probably more devastated by Castor's death than Finnick's or Prim's is a bit weird. Also I feel like they needed to wrap up the movie a bit too fast. With this I don't mean that the end was quick, because the end was in my opinion much better than in the book, but that there wasn't time for some things that would have improved the movie a bit. For example, if I remember correctly, Katniss figured out a lot that was going on with Coin by herself. However in the film Snow basically told her everything. I do remember that Katniss and Snow did have a discussion in the book, but as I remember Snow didn't just tell her everything but rather set her on the right tracks. So I was a bit sad that that realisation was taken away from her, even though she didn't believe Snow right away about it.
I might complain a little but those were pretty minor things. In the end I did enjoy the film more than the book. As I've seen all the movies now, I think it's safe to say that the second film is the best. It's still a really good franchise over all and all the credit for these people for making an excellent job making two good movies out of one very disappointing book.
P.S. I have to applaud Donald Sutherland again. He's truly a great actor.
P.P.S. If there is one thing you should prepare for before going to see this movie I have two words for you: jump scares. Yes. There is at least one part in the film where there are so many bloody jump scares (or at least anticipation for them) that you feel like you are watching a horror film.
Ami
Playing All The Stuff!
- AKA
- Amizon, Commander Shepard, Ellie, Rinoa Heartilly, Xena, Clara Oswald, Gamora, Lana Kane, Tifa Lockhart, Jodie Holmes, Chloe Price.
Fuck yes, there was one in the underground and I hadn't jumped that much since playing Until Dawn! It's like, I knew something was going to happen with all the tension during that scene, but didn't expect it to happen when it did. Your whole post summarising the film was really great.
I really did enjoy the film, maybe a bit more than the last, but that's obviously because
there was less messed up Katniss (although there's still a bit there, just significantly less than Part 1) and more of the consequences of everything going on.
Prim dying because I accidentally read it somewhere, but didn't realise Finnick was going to bite the dust either. I think because of that, I found the latter's death a bit more emotionally charged than the former.
It was a great way to see it out and glad I stuck with it.
