The Hunger Games: Mockingjay part 1

e_e

I can't help but wonder how complete and satisfying an experience this would've been if they just released it as a 4 hour long movie with an intermission at the halfway point.

On the contrary to some reviews I was never bored or less than engaged with this film but I did feel that "oh... okay then" sense of emptiness when it ended.

pixelburp

e_e wrote: »

I can't help but wonder how complete and satisfying an experience this would've been if they just released it as a 4 hour long movie with an intermission at the halfway point.

On the contrary to some reviews I was never bored or less than engaged with this film but I did feel that "oh... okay then" sense of emptiness when it ended.

Where does boredom end and emptiness begin? I bought into the world all right, heck it has intrigued me since the first film / book, but even that's not enough to sustain interest for 2 hours and 10 euro.

The film somewhat reminded me of those filler episodes from TV series, the ones where the plot can't advance because the big stuff is being held back for the finale, or midway break; instead we follow a frivolous side-plot or something. The Hunger Games couldn't even rustle up an entertaining diversion, it just padded about the place with nothing to do, filling the runtime with elongated takes and needlessly repeated scenes (did we really need to visit District 12 twice?).

ThunbergsAreGo

cloud493 wrote: »

Well the book is a lot better, in fairness. Obviously in the book Katniss is our narrator so we know whats going on in her head, her perspective, etc, whereas in the film all we have is what we see.

I found the last book horrible to be honest, much prefered the previous two.

Not sure I will go see this in the cinema, but defo on the eventual to watch list

constitutionus

i thought it was very good.

wasnt bored in the least and indeed found the emotional intensity of some pieces were brilliant.

only thing i didnt like was knowing going straight in that i'd get no resolution and as such towards the end kept thinking "is this where itll end? is THIS where itll end?"

shoulda been one film IMO.

But still ill give it a good 7/10 for what it did.

e_e

pixelburp wrote: »

Where does boredom end and emptiness begin? I bought into the world all right, heck it has intrigued me since the first film / book, but even that's not enough to sustain interest for 2 hours and 10 euro.

To be clear the emptiness came from the film hitting an abrupt full stop after pretty much engrossing me throughout and the rest of the opposite of empty to me. I actually found it refreshing how there was rarely a scene that didn't haven an emotional or thematic pulse to it. Don't think these films are near the best that cinema has to offer but I'll take them over 95% of blockbusters that just have me sitting there for 2 hours completely removed from what is happening on screen. I kind of love too how big budget films that are ostensibly aimed at teen girls have more going on beneath the surface than that of those targeting adult men.

Bacchus

Just back from it. Slightly underwhelmed by it. I definitely preferred the first two. This one just felt like a movie without a purpose. The war propaganda angle was a bit OTT and repetitive.

For me it only kicked off for the extraction scene but then that just abruptly ended and hey everyone is back fine. But hey we got out easy! Did noone think maybe it was a trap and maybe one of the victors is a mole/plant. I'm surprised they didn't end it with Peta getting hit over the head and Katnis near death. I don't think the scenes following explaining that Peta had been brainwashed added anything, nor the scene with him going bezerk in the bed.

That_Guy

My assessment:

Katniss makes a film, stands in front of a lot of people and moans for 2 hours.

Weakest of the films by far and I really enjoyed the first two in the series.

Bacchus

Another few things on reflection... (this may be slightly spoilerific but I don't go into specifics)

There is very little action in this. For any fans of the first two expecting some action, there is very little here. In fact the ONLY action sequence involving Katniss is shown in the trailer... literally. There are a couple of other sequences but only one gets the heart racing really. This is far more of a political/propaganda movie - without any sort of subtly either I might add.

This is probably the cheapest blockbuster ever to be made. The cast cost a packet I'd say but there are about 4 or 5 settings in the entire movie. Most of the movie is shot either a bunker or in the ruins of one of the districts. All the colour, OTT showiness & weirdness of the Capitol has been replaced by military grey. It's such a bland movie visually.

For a movie about revolution, we didn't really get shown much of it. All we are treated to is Katniss doing her best Braveheart impression a couple of times followed by a 1 minute scene showing an act of revolution in one of the districts. It would have been nice to see a bit more of the revolution itself across the districts to get a sense that they are somewhat organised as opposed to just carrying out disconnected random suicide runs.

Outkast_IRE

Weakest film by a long shot, honestly felt like it would of been served alot better by being a 3hr epic that covered the final book adequately.

Obviously the pacing of the movie was entirely different to the last two, the entire movie is just a setup to the final one.

Obvious cash in before the current franchise ends, if anyone is on the fence i would be telling them to sit this one out and watch it at home, and maybe head to the cinema next year for the final installment.

Spon Farmer

Can someone tell me why

every building in District 12 is in ruins except for the Everdeen house?

cloud493

Spon Farmer wrote: »

Can someone tell me why

every building in District 12 is in ruins except for the Everdeen house?

According the books

the capitol spared the houses in the victors village, which includes Katniss's house, to have places for people to stay in they come to film the ruins. The film doesn't explain it well.

Spon Farmer

cloud493 wrote: »

According the books

the capitol spared the houses in the victors village, which includes Katniss's house, to have places for people to stay in they come to film the ruins. The film doesn't explain it well.

Thanks

Pierce_1991

cloud493 wrote: »

According the books

the capitol spared the houses in the victors village, which includes Katniss's house, to have places for people to stay in they come to film the ruins. The film doesn't explain it well.

Also:

Correct me if I'm wrong but was there a fresh white rose left in the house specifically for Katniss to see. Was there maybe an element of Snow, knowing she would go back there, saying to Katniss the destruction of District 12 was your doing.

Liam O

I felt it was the strongest thematically of the 3. I didn't like the first one bit felt the plot was good enough for me to read the books and as I thought would be the book was actually about a skinny girl who works for her family to eat and isn't automatically the killing machine you see in the actual Hunger games. The film cut out a lot of that but seeing as it's not in Katniss' head you get a more macro view I guess so it's excusable.

Catching fire then showed a lot more of the scare tactics and intimidation from the capitol which was interesting and brought some great set pieces. Again it's more macro than the book but it was presented very well and it was on of the best book adaptations I've seen I think.

Mockingjay is about war by propaganda. They made some changes again to the book but kept that reclusive feeling and I think showed the mind of Katniss a bit more than the previous two which was difficult then when you had the razzle and dazzle of the games to present. It shows her anger a bit more and also her other side which is neglected in the first 2 a bit. President Coin was underutilized I feel, there wasn't enough back and forth between her and Katniss more than "I don't want to" ... "oh ok then".

All that said though I felt interested the whole way through. The lack of action was probably more of a time thing and I would have liked to see her go out for one more vignette or something but they got that feeling of isolation spot on I think and the back and forth between her and Peeta was as good as they could have made it. In the book this is just a part of an overall story but in the film they made it about this theme of revolution or war by propaganda and I feel they achieved that. People going in expecting quasi-main character deaths every 10 minutes like the previous 2 will be disappointed but if you consider the overall arc of the film you'll be very impressed imo.

Mickeroo

Felt like half a film to me. It was very well made and entertaining with some very good moments (

Hanging tree song dam attack for one

) but ultimately it was thoroughly unsatisfying in the end. I think it will play a lot better alongside the final part but honestly I felt the last book wasn't very good and needed to be streamlined rather than bloated into two films though.