The Hunger Games: Catching Fire Reviews

To be honest, even though I did like 'The Hunger Games', I wasn't exactly blown away by this first installment but I was still eager to see how this franchise would evolve. On top of that, everybody seemed to agree that this sequel was an improvement so it was definitely promising. Eventually, it was indeed decent but, honestly, I failed to see how this installment was so much better than the previous one. I mean, sure, this time, they almost doubled the budget and it was really obvious on the screen with some much more ambitious visuals but, aside from this, it remained on the same level, fairly entertaining but not much more than that, I'm afraid. For example, there is one thing that kept bothering me is that they try to sell you the fact that Katniss Everdeen is a strong character but I actually disagree. I mean, in those 2 movies, maybe even more the 2nd time around, she didn't make one single decision on her own and she was constantly a pawn, either for the bad guys or for the good guys. Of course, she argues, she looks pissed off most of the time but it is as far as she can go and I think it shows the limitations of this character and this story in general. Anyway, to conclude, I'm not a huge fan but I have to admit that it was still a solid YA book adaptation and it is definitely worth a look, especially if you like the genre.

I was hoping this would improve on the first because, well that's what people said it did, and then it turned out to be the same as the first: You only truly understand and enjoy the value if you read the books. This is not what I want from adaptations, they should be an isolated art form and not require any previous knowledge to enjoy.

Flat acting and terrible pacing also make this an average dystopian fantasy.

I wondered if 'Catching Fire' would be as good as the first 'Hunger Games' flick and to my surprise it turned out to be better!

'The Hunger Games' was a decent movie but it didn't hold a candle to the sequel! In 'Catching Fire', Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) and Peeta Mellark (John Hutcherson) have survived the Hunger Games but they won't kill each other and later they end up entering the 75th Hunger Games! The title 'Catching Fire' says it all, the marvellous effects of flames, the epic fight scenes, the great acting and the (slightly) more convincing story made 'Catching Fire' an improvement on the original!

Now I loved the first The Hunger Games movie and I enjoyed this was too. I did however feel that this one lacked some of the spark the first movie had. It seemed like this one was a bit longer and still made the larger chunk about what happened before the games. Although I do admit that the events before the games in this one were a bit more interesting than the last one it was still kind of boring. The cast is pretty much the same with the inclusion of Philip Seymour Hoffman (R.I.P.), Jeffrey Wright, and Jena Malone. The tributes are much more unique in this one as their age range is much wider and they all have more knowledge of what to do. It also didn't have quite enough of the action I was hoping to get. Then again I am one of those who hasn't read the books so I probably don't know what I am talking about. As a movie goer though I do wish this had more to offer to a wider audience. Anyways at least it's a good series to watch. It could have been better, but I did really enjoy it despite everything.

Whatever you say I am not a big fan of this franchise. I did not like much the first installment other than a decent entertainment. So this was another 'let it go' movie from me. But when the time came to see it, I was a little surprised of being better than the first. The second hour was good and before one was a mild slow. The real interest is the, follow-up movies from here on. The end of this part created a curiosity for the next movies of the series. Looks like it would be very interesting with big changes in story than first two.

The movie series supposed to be a trilogy, but you know it tasted big commercial success that mean big buck in filmmakers pocket. In 2013 this movie was the highest gross from north America. So like 'Deathly Hollows' and 'Breaking Dawn' this franchise following the same path by breaking the third volume into two. Whatever, I am expecting the third and the fourth movies 'Mockingjay part I and II' would have more exciting than previous movies with many twists and turns.

It was so sad to hear about Philip Seymour's sudden tragic demise. His best parts are yet to come in the next movies of the movie series. The franchise told they wrapped most of his portions of the last two volumes and now they decided to make minor changes in his character. That's good to hear, hope he it will be an unforgettable show from the great actor.

The end scene before the credits roll the logo of 'Catching Fire' changes into 'Mockingjay'. It was awesome, I just sensed some great is ahead. So like teenagers, it interested me and created curiosity. Looks like I got reason to watch 'Mockingjay' movies.

7.5/10

My two cents, As sequels go this one is on par surpasses the first movie. I couldnt make it through the second book but the movie made the book look weak. (in my opinion I am aware) I do believe the Hunger Games whole hunt seemed a bit rushed... But it made me want to see mocking jay.

The acting was awesome Woody Harrelson has reinvented his career which i never thought i could say.

four stars just because Gale annoyed me.

"The other victors. Because of her, they all pose a threat. Because of her, they all think they are invincible."

For those unfamiliar with Suzanne Collins' Hunger Games novels, 2012's The Hunger Games was a tough sell, cursed with nauseating shaky-cam cinematography, too much sluggish exposition and many similarities to the superior Battle Royale. But with a fresh creative team and a bigger budget, 2013's The Hunger Games: Catching Fire is a superior sequel, more refined and better realised in practically every aspect. More or less all the flaws of the original flick are eliminated here, and the narrative is far more fascinating and engaging, making this an easier sell for the uninitiated. With the groundwork laid, Catching Fire builds on the original film's foundation, expounding on relationships and taking the story to its next logical step, sparking to life what has the potential to become a truly remarkable series. It's simply a fine motion picture all-round, to the extent that it makes the original movie look worse than it actually is.

Catching Fire picks up where the previous movie left off, finding Katniss (Jennifer Lawrence) and Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) attempting to return to normality after becoming the first dual victors in Hunger Games history. But the win has serious repercussions, as it's perceived by some as an act of defiance, leading to rumblings of a rebellion developing in the Districts. Under orders from President Snow (Donald Sutherland), Katniss and Peeta are sent on a victory tour, forced to keep up the romantic façade that may or may not be false. With Snow worried that an uprising is imminent, newly appointed game-maker Plutarch (Philip Seymour Hoffman) spearheads a plan to bring about Katniss' demise: he organises another Hunger Games involving previous winners. With Katniss and Peeta chosen as tributes for the next competition, they are sent into another intense test of survival, battling against such opponents as the borderline psychotic Johanna (Jena Malone) and the pompous Finnick (Sam Claflin). The games quickly intensify, with Katniss forced to make alliances as Plutarch and Snow use every trick at their disposal in a bid to kill off the young revolutionary.

The first picture was spoiled by a strictly mediocre translation of the source novel, excluding some crucial details while adding too much leaden exposition in other areas. Catching Fire, on the other hand, was written by Simon Beaufoy and Michael Arndt, both of whom have won Oscars for their efforts on acclaimed motion pictures (Beaufoy wrote Slumdog Millionaire, Arndt wrote Little Miss Sunshine and Toy Story 3). Thus, part deux is more polished in the script department, with a better attention to detail. (Hovercrafts are used to pick up the bodies of the fallen during the games, a fact that the original movie ignored but Catching Fire makes clear.) It helps that the narrative is better-structured as well. There's more going on in Catching Fire than just the games, concentrating on the repercussions of Katniss' dual win with Peeta, and detailing the uprising. It's riveting stuff, and it all comes to a head for a finale that had me on the edge of my seat. It closes on a cliffhanger of sorts, building anticipation for the next movie that I am honestly looking forward to. The narrative goes in unexpected directions, subverting expectations with clever twists and turns (providing you haven't read the books). Moreover, the material gains full traction on-screen; Catching Fire is often gripping viewing.

Since the first movie was such a gamble, the filmmakers clearly did not have the proper money or resources at their disposal to fully realise the project's potential. But Catching Fire was produced for a more generous sum, and it shows, making for a far smoother experience. Gary Ross is not a bad director, but he struggled with the 2012 picture, creating an overlong, messy experience marred by some of the worst cinematography this side of Transformers. With no more shaky-cam, new director Francis Lawrence achieves an aesthetic that the franchise has needed since the beginning, devising a steady routine of smooth wide and medium shots, resulting in action set-pieces that are both coherent and exciting. Lawrence additionally creates a grittier experience, showing that games combatants are dehydrated and exhausted, and introducing new threats (including a poisonous mist) that are truly nail-biting. Admittedly, Catching Fire does lose steam a few times, but the games are more captivating here than before, and the movie goes down surprisingly easily in spite of its gargantuan 140-minute runtime.

Catching Fire is further bolstered by the ensemble cast. It's the supporting players who truly shine here, with new additions adding a great deal of colour to the proceedings. Out of the newcomers, the most notable is Jena Malone, who's introduced while taking her clothes off and goes on to steal every single scene in which she appears. Malone's character of Johanna has the most spunk of all the characters, and the actress ran with it, delivering the most memorable performance in the cast. Also notable is Sam Claflin, who's ostensibly established as the trademark arrogant asshole but is soon bestowed with genuine depth, developing into one of the real heroes of the movie. It's a great surprise, and Claflin sells it like a champ. But perhaps the most significant new addition is Hoffman, a superlative performer who nails the role of Plutarch, providing suitable gravitas. Contributing further flavour are returning actors Stanley Tucci and Toby Jones, who host the titular games with enjoyable panache and flamboyance.

The other returning actors are for the most part solid as well, the standout being Woody Harrelson who continues to have a total ball in the role of Haymitch, while Elizabeth Banks remains an energetic chaperone. It's such a large and impressive cast that the main players look somewhat uninteresting in comparison. Jennifer Lawrence is again great as the passionate Katniss, but Hutcherson and Hemsworth make little impact as Peeta and Gale (respectively). In fairness, the roles are very standard-order and flat, but the actors do very little to bring them to life, coming across as proverbial pretty-boys. Rounding out the cast is a frightening Sutherland, and Lenny Kravitz who's eminently appealing as Katniss' fashion designer.

The best compliment which can be awarded to The Hunger Games: Catching Fire is that it made a convert out of this reviewer. It's not just good but great, displaying cinematic maturity and far more respect for its audience than most of this year's summer blockbusters, and it can be enjoyed by casual movie-goers as much as the established fans. Indeed, even those who aren't interested in the saga as a whole will be enthralled due to the competent filmmaking and top-flight storytelling, achieving the type of greatness that Twilight can only dream of. It's an action-adventure with heart and intelligence, and it's easy to overlook the picture's minor flaws.

8.2/10

Is the rough economy getting you down? Frustrated with taxes? Do you hate the government? Are the feelings mutual? If this is you, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire just might be the feel-good movie of the year. It shows the audience that as bad things are for some today, it's nothing compared to what could happen in the future.

For those unfamiliar with the Hunger Games universe, there are 12 Districts, and once a year, one boy and one girl from each district are selected randomly to compete in the "Hunger Games." The Hunger Games are a barbaric fight to the death, where the lone survivor is the victor. Previous victor Katniss Everdeen and Peeta Mellark showed some daring defiance during their year in the Hunger Games, which the Capitol is not pleased with. They are threatened by the ominous President Snow, as Snow realizes that the rebellion of Katniss Everdee could cause a massive uprising.

For those who can't take a joke, Catching Fire is NOT the feel-good movie of the year. Far from it; it's dark- much darker than the first- and we witness the brutal deaths and punishments of many individuals. Those unfamiliar with the books will almost certainly be shocked at many intervals.

While the first movie focused primarily on the Games themselves, as well as the effect it has on those in the 12 Districts, Catching Fire is more about the politics of the Hunger Games universe. And while that may not sound especially exciting, Catching Fire is never less than entertaining, and it's rarely anything but gripping. The thought-provoking themes of the original are greatly expanded, and Catching Fire treats audiences with surprising intelligence. This is especially impressive for a YA film adaption; a genre that rarely reaches this degree of intellect.

Just like the first film, there's some killer social commentary, and yes, there is another Hunger Games which puts previous victors in the Games- including Katniss. But this new set of games isn't quite what you would expect if you've seen the first film.

The build-up to the Hunger Games is strong, but not nearly as strong as that witnessed in the original. The original had me on the edge of my seat before the Hunger Games even started. This time around, I was very much intrigued before the Games, but rarely in much suspense.

And even when the Games start, they're not as savage and frantic as the Games in the original. Most of the time, competitors are running from obstacles in the environment, rather than other competitors. (At the end of the day, there are reasons for this, but I don't want to reveal any spoilers).

Catching Fire embraces various elements that weren't in the first film, or weren't as evident. For instance, Catching Fire can be very funny at times. The original film had some laughs as well, but not as many as this one (likely due to the extended amount of social commentary). There are also some wonderfully creepy and just plain weird bits. And no, I'm not referring to the goofy makeup on the Capitol members- though while we're talking about it, Hair and Makeup, and the Costumes are very much worthy of Oscar nominations, though it's a coin toss to predict if it will get them.

Also noteworthy is that the cinematography is much improved from the original. It reaches a compromise between those who liked the raw look of the shaky cam, and those seeking a more clear and less dizzying effect. The shaky cam is gone, but the camera still moves around slightly, like it's a home video, therefore giving you the best of each. Though there is one dancing scene that, while technically proficient, made me a bit dizzy.

The biggest issue with Catching Fire is the same as it was for the original- the romance. For 90% of the film, Catching Fire treats the audience with respect and intelligence. The script is good, and the acting is great. But both of these things falter when the romance takes stage. Just like in the first film, it's very poorly written- though there are no lines quite as cringe-worthy as some of the dialogue in the first ("I watched you going home everyday. Everyday."). Still, these scenes drag the movie down, and they're the only thing that stops Catching Fire (and the first film for that matter) from becoming a film that audiences can watch and say they enjoyed without guilt. The romance is simply unbelievable, and immensely hammy.

The cast is excellent. Jennifer Lawrence (who some people are calling the main reason to see this film) is phenomenal as Katniss Everdeen- as she was in the original. The torment she's in- both physically, and psychologically- is totally believable. Donald Sutherland is back as the chilling President Snow, and Woody Harrelson is in fine form as Haymitch. The hilarious comic relief (with even more screentime than in the original) comes courtesy of Stanley Tucci and Elizabeth Banks as Caesar Flickerman and Effie Trinket respectively.

James Newton Howard's score improves on his work in the original. There are many extensions of themes from the first film (most notably the "Horn of Plenty" theme), and the mildly creepy violin theme for Wiress and Betee is exceptional- I only wish it was used more!

While I don't think Catching Fire is better than the original- it's simply not as savagely intense, nor as heartbreaking as the first- this is still a superb win for the Hunger Games franchise, and will leave audiences starving for the sequel(s). The very ending- in fact- will leave fans of the book with a knowing smile, whilst those unexposed to the source material will feel like they were punched in the stomach (in a good way), and they'll be scrambling to get their hands on the third book.

I liked 2012's The Hunger Games. It was an entertaining and well-made film, but it also managed to be thought-provoking with some spot-on social commentary. The sequel, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire, is everything the last film was, but improved even more. Which is a significant achievement, considering how good The Hunger Games was and seeing as Catching Fire is an improvement, it makes this film one of the best films from 2013 so far. It's an extremely entertaining, thrilling and thought-provoking blockbuster!

Catching Fire does in many ways follow the same structure as the previous film. There's the lead up to the games and then the games themselves. But thankfully there's been enough change in the story, to avoid the film being a rehash of the last film. Yes, the film has the lead characters sent into yet another deadly game, which can only end with one survivor, but luckily, director Francis Lawrence manages to steer the focus away from creating a simple bloodbath. Because even if the "main attraction" of the series are the actual games and the deaths that occur from those games, Lawrence manages to tone down the violence a bit. It's certainly violent for a film with the audience it has, but not anywhere near as being as violent as the last film. The reason for that is quite simple, but equally genius. Because this film is about the after match of the previous game and how it gave everyone hope. It's definitely darker and more grim, but behind all that, this is a film about the rise of hope. About giving a repressed people one thing to hold on, one thing to fight for. The previous film was about introducing us to everywhere, and showing us of cruel this world is. Catching Fire is still cruel, but it does also show us that shed of light. It's actually quite intriguing, and the actual themes of these films are certainly interesting to discuss.



As I said, the structure is similar to the last film, but there are some minor changes here. The actual games are shortened down and not as graphic as they were in the last film. This time they're actually fighting more against the Capitol rather than the other "contestants". Causing this version of the Hunger Games to be more about the districts vs. the Capitol, rather than district vs. district. It's a much welcome change, and it also fits in nicely with the underlying theme of hope. Some of them are naturally killing each other, but there's not too much of that. But the biggest change lies in what happens before the games start. There are certainly some scenes where they have to train, and do interviews and such. Which is sort of obligatory, but thankfully, there's not a lot of that. They could've easily just done the same thing as they did in the last film and put together a much longer training montage. But seeing as they didn't do that, the film does really tell that it's not about the Hunger Games. It's about its effect on the world. So instead of seeing training sequences, overlong fashion shows and individual interviews for a second time, we get to see things that are actually important. We get to see people standing up against how they're being mistreated. And we get to see the Capitol trying to prevent a rebellion. This makes for a much better viewing experience.

One thing that also makes for a much better viewing experience is the change of visual style. One of my major issues with the last film was the shaking camera. In Catching Fire it's completely gone. Which is a huge relief, because you actually get to see the action that's happening on screen. I do acknowledge that shaky camera may create some intensity, but there shouldn't be any need for that as long as the action is well-directed. Which is the case here. The steady camera manages to produce even more thrilling and suspenseful moments, than what the previous film did. I was on the edge of my seat throughout the entire film.



Francis Lawrence deserves every bit of credit he gets for directing this film, but the true star of this film is Jennifer Lawrence. Despite of everything else in this film being as excellent as it is, it wouldn't be half as compelling or engaging as it is without her. She's quite simply an extraordinary actress, who's capable of pulling me straight into this film with her emotions. I get emotionally engaged in her character and the film because of her acting. I care for her and I do believe every line she delivers. I believe every emotion she send out. The rest of the actors in the film are naturally good as well. Philip Seymour Hoffman being particularly excellent. But this is Jennifer Lawrence's show. I'm actually quite into the tiny love triangle that's going on her. And I'm rooting for Katniss/Peeta. I think they're quite cute together, and Lawrence is just delightful when she's playing cute and warm. She might be my new celebrity crush, if I'm being completely honest.

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire is an excellent film that surpasses it's predecessor in terms of quality. It's cleverly written, beautifully shot, well-directed, wonderfully acted and tightly edited. It's interesting, thought-provoking, emotionally engaging and very thrilling. It's always refreshing to see a blockbuster that manages to be as entertaining, as it is thoughtful. Catching Fire succeeds in doing so, and is therefore one of the best films of the year. The ending is bound to leave you thrilled for the next chapter in this franchise. Count me there on opening day.