With sentimental episodes, complete with music pointing to the emotion one ought to feel, it mirrors the first film in that the first half is all about the build-up to the 'Games', sketching out, very roughly, the characters - participants and organisers - with concentration unsurprisingly on the Jennifer Lawrence character, which she plays brilliantly, by the way - and the ensuing hour or more, which is the 'Games' itself. And 'games' is the operative word as time and again I was thinking that the whole concept reminded me of a computer game where lives are disposable and one tries to win at all costs (within pre-ordained rules, of course). Well, one's own life is at stake, after all.
I found it a film brutal to the point of nastiness, but that is precisely what the game is intended to portray.
Good to see Donald Sutherland again, and Stanley Tucci too, as M.C. (even more outrageous than before), Woody Harrelson - and Philip Seymour Hoffman, who is a formidable presence in whatever film he appears.
Can't believe that I gave the first film a rating of 7.5. I did think higher of it than this one, though part of that will have been due to the novelty of the concept. Witnessing exactly the same formula all over again was borderline boring. Can't see myself mustering much enthusiasm for the next in the series, though I probably will go. Or will I?
I give 'Catching Fire' a.........................4.5.
oh no! I haven't seen it yet. The books are great. That is a disappointment... ;(
ReplyDeleteYou must go, Sol. As at now, the average ratings submitted on IMDb is a sky-high 8.3, and I would expect you to be more in tune with current tastes and fashions than fuddy-duddy ol' me.
DeleteGood reviews on radio 4
ReplyDeleteI won't bother..though I did see Philomena tonight
All the reviews I've seen have been positive to a greater or lesser degree, so I'm more than happy to accept that my downbeat opinion is a minority one. All I can say is that I honestly did NOT especially enjoy it - though I have seen plenty worse this year alone.
Delete(I've seen your comment on 'Philomena' and responded to it there.)
Another 'count me out" movie.
ReplyDeleteI don't do well with dystopia sci-fi. I don't have good boundaries with them; I come out depressed and convinced these movies make self-fulfilling prophecies.
I'm with you on that, Dr Spo, at least up to a point. In fact during this film I had leisure enough to start a list in my mind of all the literature 'classics' that have such a negative view of the future, '1984', 'The Time Machine', 'The Handmaid's Tale', 'A Clockwork Orange' - the list goes on and on. In fact not one work jumps out to me as offering a future for which we can yearn. I put it down to anything that says how wonderful life will be for generations to come just will not sell. Maybe people need the reassurance that life as we live it now is as good as it gets. If it were to be so, it's a sobering thought, though the idea must have been round for centuries. Anyway, which of us now would give up all our present material comforts in exchange for a life of hardship and drudge in the past?
DeleteI drive Someone bats as some dystopia films I want to see; it is hard to convey why one is 'OK" or not. I like Time Machine and The Handmaid's tale, probably because they have enough 'fantasy' to make it unreal enough to allow some distance to it. "1984' feels too 'real' and likely.
DeleteYes, I agree. It's strange how some works do not leave one depressed while others most definitely do. 'The Time Machine' is an exhilarating read which despite its portrayal of the future doesn't dent my confidence that gradual improvements will inevitably happen. Yet the same author's 'Things to Come' is just frankly scary.
DeleteI think you're absolutely right when you say that holding onto reality makes it more frightening - particularly that fiction with a strong political edge.
I was disappointed in this one too but I am almost sure I will see the final installment when it arrived; if for no other reason than I have invested 5 hrs in this story already and want to see how it resolves itself. I do think I will read the books first.
ReplyDeleteI caught the last half of the first HG movie on tv last night. I wouldn't say it is great but it is definitely better than Catching Fire.
I think I heard that the final book has been split into two films, H.K. - so it looks like there is a still a double dose of instalments on the way. I'm seriously thinking that I have better things to do and spend my money on than this. Maybe I'd have more mental stamina to see it through if I was familiar with the books.
Delete(I'm already so NOT looking forward to the next part of 'The Hobbit' but suppose I'd better see it. At least there I have read the book/s of this and LOTR - several times.))