The Hunger Games: Catching Fire

[Brian in Mesa]

The Hunger Games: Catching Fire

Release Date: November 21, 2013 (2D theaters and IMAX, p.m. screenings)
Studio: Lionsgate
Director: Francis Lawrence
Screenwriter: Simon Beaufoy, Michael deBruyn, Scott Frank
Genre: Action, Drama, Sci-Fi
MPAA Rating: PG-13 (for intense sequences of violence and action, some frightening images, thematic elements, a suggestive situation and language)
Website: TheHungerGamesmovie.com | Facebook | Twitter

Starring: Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, Liam Hemsworth, Lenny Kravitz, Elizabeth Banks, Stanley Tucci, Donald Sutherland, Toby Jones, Woody Harrelson, Jena Malone, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Amanda Plummer, Lynn Cohen, Patrick St. Esprit, Meta Golding, Bruno Gunn, Alan Ritchson, E. Roger Mitchell, Maria Howell, Stephanie Leigh Schlund, Sam Claflin, Jeffrey Wright

Plot Summary: "The Hunger Games: Catching Fire" begins as Katniss Everdeen has returned home safe after winning the 74th Annual Hunger Games along with fellow tribute Peeta Mellark. Winning means that they must turn around and leave their family and close friends, embarking on a "Victor's Tour' of the districts. Along the way Katniss senses that a rebellion is simmering, but the Capitol is still very much in control as President Snow prepares the 75th Annual Hunger Games (The Quarter Quell) - a competition that could change Panem forever.

You must be registered for see images attach

 

[thirty-two]

I have a movie date with friends this Wednesday to see it, but I don't think I can hold out that long. I need to see this movie immediately!! So happy it's been getting good reviews.

 

[Matt L]

I liked it better than the first Hunger Games

 

[Shane]

It certainly couldn't be worse than the 1st.

 

[UncleChris]

It certainly couldn't be worse than the 1st.

Agreed (surprise-surprise!!!)

 

[crisper57]

I liked it. One of the best adaptations of a book I've ever seen in terms of faithfulness and execution. Sure, they cut out the unnecessary fluff, invented a few scenes to propel the story forward, and axed a few characters. Usually, this would result in an outcry from fans of the novel, but I've not heard any complaints about their artistic decisions here.

 

[Brian in Mesa]

It certainly couldn't be worse than the 1st.

Totally agree.

 

[thirty-two]

Loved it, loved it, loved it. Enjoyed every last second. Cant wait to see it again. Jennifer Lawrence is a goddess. Woody is a perfect Haymitch. LOVED IT.

When does the blu-ray come out? Take my money now!

 

[Stout]

I read the first book, but it was just okay, so I didn't read the other two. As I'm an avid reader that loves book series, this is a pretty indicting detail. The first movie was okay, but everything--EVERYTHING--was in shaky cam. I hugged my sister--in shaky cam. I walked through the front door--in shaky cam. I'll never watch the first movie again.

All that said, this movie was pretty cool. Way, way better than the first one, and without all the annoying shaky cam. I'll not buy it or go see it again, but I'd put it on in the background once it makes HBO.

 

[UncleChris]

Good news and bad news....

The good news is that it was indeed better than the first one.

The bad news is that the only reason it was better was because there was no shaky cam.


Just a mishmash. This movie is to films what Sarah Palin is to coherent sentence structure. Jennifer Lawrence spent a good amount of time with an expression on her face akin to trying to take care of week-old constipation. Plot holes galore. Year 2113 technology mixed with 1949 technology. Clumsy in its attempts to make political statements. Just not very good.

Certainly not the worst picture I've ever seen, but.......... oh well. You get the idea.

 

[Cheesebeef]

Chris, we must be watching different movies.

this was pretty damn great. The last shot, watching Katniss' eyes go from sorrow to resolve was awesome.

I kinda saw the BIG twist coming, but didn't care. the whole movie was incredibly well done. can't wait to see where this goes.

 

[Covert Rain]

Good movie. I have to admit I was surprised. This was vastly superior to original movie IMO. Better story...better acting...lots of action.

I liked the shot with Katniss opening her eyes but I was having deja vu. It reminded me of the ending of Twilight Breaking Dawn Part 1 and Bella opening her eyes at the end. They were different from an emotional standpoint but regardless the shots almost seemed identical.

 

[UncleChris]

Chris, we must be watching different movies.

this was pretty damn great. The last shot, watching Katniss' eyes go from sorrow to resolve was awesome.

I kinda saw the BIG twist coming, but didn't care. the whole movie was incredibly well done. can't wait to see where this goes.

"...eye of the beholder, and all that...."

 

[BigRedRage]

seeing all these comments and them being entertwined with scenes from twilight just proves to me that I have made the right decision by not seeing ANY of these or the twilight movies.

 

[NoelPHX]

made my wife go see this with me. (payback for anchorman 2). I loved it. She hated the first one but liked this one. Guess my plan failed
Oh well.

 

[NJCardFan]

Good news and bad news....

The good news is that it was indeed better than the first one.

The bad news is that the only reason it was better was because there was no shaky cam.


Just a mishmash. This movie is to films what Sarah Palin is to coherent sentence structure. Jennifer Lawrence spent a good amount of time with an expression on her face akin to trying to take care of week-old constipation. Plot holes galore. Year 2113 technology mixed with 1949 technology. Clumsy in its attempts to make political statements. Just not very good.

Certainly not the worst picture I've ever seen, but.......... oh well. You get the idea.

You mean like Obama?



Also, how about you fixing your sentence structure yourself before casting aspersions at others.

 

[UncleChris]

You mean like Obama?



Also, how about you fixing your sentence structure yourself before casting aspersions at others.

In the spirit of Christmas, I'm sorry Santa didn't bring you a sense of humor. You need one.

And since you've obviously forgotten the obvious, this thread is about the movie The Hunger Games, not about your crush on a former Alaska Governor or your purported editorial capabilities.

 

[Chaplin]

Great sequel, and better than the first--a rare feat, even today. Good action, and while it took a little while to get going, it was nice to see how everything came together in the end and the how the ante was upped with her resolve.

Shots that linger on a character on a long time showing her mood through facial expression is basically what movies are about--show, don't tell. Funny enough, I was reminded of the end of Captain Phillips and Tom Hanks in the sick bay. COmpletely different movies and situations, but the character work in both was great (Tom Hanks was the best, obviously, but you get the idea).

 

[Cheesebeef]

Great sequel, and better than the first--a rare feat, even today. Good action, and while it took a little while to get going, it was nice to see how everything came together in the end and the how the ante was upped with her resolve.

Shots that linger on a character on a long time showing her mood through facial expression is basically what movies are about--show, don't tell. Funny enough, I was reminded of the end of Captain Phillips and Tom Hanks in the sick bay. COmpletely different movies and situations, but the character work in both was great (Tom Hanks was the best, obviously, but you get the idea).

Yeah...that sick bay scene was pretty incredible. Broke me down after two hours of non-stop tension.

 

[gmabel830]

Just saw it.. seems like I am in the minority, but I liked the first one better. I didn't read the books, but my wife gave me a five minute overview of each book.I guess I was expecting it to be more like the first one with the surprise twist at the end and thought they kind of flew through the actual games/less action than I was expecting. I understand people's thoughts around it having a little deeper plot and no shaky cam though.

 

[jw7]

Just saw it.. seems like I am in the minority, but I liked the first one better.

Yes, thie first one was much better. Came out on DVD this week, and the 1rst 90 minutes were pull out your hair boring,

Read the trilogy, but this movie is a 2 1/2 hour of your life you won't get back. Horrible.

 

[Shane]

Yes, thie first one was much better. Came out on DVD this week, and the 1rst 90 minutes were pull out your hair boring,

Read the trilogy, but this movie is a 2 1/2 hour of your life you won't get back. Horrible.

Sounds just like the first

 

[thirty-two]

Pre-ordered the bluray/dvd combo, got it Friday, watched it twice already. Love this movie!

 

[Stout]

Yes, thie first one was much better. Came out on DVD this week, and the 1rst 90 minutes were pull out your hair boring,

Read the trilogy, but this movie is a 2 1/2 hour of your life you won't get back. Horrible.

The first one was virtually unwatchable. Not because of the content, but because of the idiotic shaky came. She hugs her sister--in shaky cam. She picks up a glass of water--in shaky cam. Blech. It was a headache to watch from beginning to end.

 

[Covert Rain]

Yes, thie first one was much better. Came out on DVD this week, and the 1rst 90 minutes were pull out your hair boring,

Read the trilogy, but this movie is a 2 1/2 hour of your life you won't get back. Horrible.

Couldn't disagree more. The second one was far superior and this is coming from someone who was dragged to both by my wife and daughter. Better story, better acting and better overall story. The fist one was OK but I was pleasantly surprised by this one.