PDA

View Full Version : Catching Fire



Stiger05
11-22-2013, 08:07 PM
Saw it last night. I thought it was fantastic! Better than the first. They held closer to the book, even though they obviously had leave some things out. Great acting. Spot on casting. I had my doubts about the casting in the beginning (I've always hated the choice for Peeta), but they really came through. I even thought Josh Hutcherson stepped it up in this one and felt more Peeta-like.

I'm really glad they got rid of the shaky camera from the first one--that drove me crazy.

Overall, I enjoyed it way more than I thought I would. What about y'all?

Cyia
11-22-2013, 08:52 PM
How did they handle the hovercrafts and the start of the rebellion?

The crafts weren't shown much, and never in their body-removing capacity during the first movie, so I'm wondering if the impact of seeing one snatch up characters is lessened in the sequel.

Likewise, the first movie showed the rebellion sparking after Rue's death, when District 11 flashed into a violent uprising, so I'm curious how that changed the presentation of the rebellion in this one.

katiemac
11-22-2013, 09:40 PM
Cyia: You see hovercrafts taking tribute bodies out of the arena in this one.

Josh definitely stepped up. I haven't read the books in awhile but overall there was only one thing that I thought could have been more dramatic: The reveal of District 13. The setup there was lacking.

maggi90w1
11-23-2013, 03:37 AM
Just saw it. It was great. 146 Minutes of pure tension. I was at the edge of my seat the whole time. My three friends (none of them read the books) were also totally emotionally involved.
I'm very pleased.

itsmary
11-23-2013, 06:26 AM
As close to perfect as humanly possible. But I'm obsessed with The Hunger Games, so I'm sure I would have love it even if it was sub par.

The only thing that bugged me was the way they handled the fake pregnancy. After Peeta announced it, everyone just sort of forgot about it. Nobody in the arena even acted like they thought was pregnant.

K.B. Parker
11-23-2013, 07:41 AM
I've never read the books but I have a deep love for this franchise so far. Is there anything better than Jennifer Lawrence? At this point I can't say otherwise. I read two reviews before I saw this movie last night and it was compared to Dark Knight and The Empire Strikes Back - I agree with both.

The casting? Amazing. Katniss? Never leave me.

My only complaint was the girl sitting beside me. She had two friends to the right of her and about four behind her. Even though I never read the books I knew everything that would happen before it did because she felt the need to tell each of her friends about it, "This is where the fog blah blah blah." And she didn't feel the need to whisper about it either.

Then, I'm not sure how the book ended but it seems she should have known how the movie would end but began cursing at the screen when the credits began to roll. "That's [expletive] stupid! That's the worst ending I have ever seen. They ruined the book."

Whatever. I'll be more selective in my seat selection for Mockingjay.

Channy
11-23-2013, 08:37 AM
Peeta's not injured or has a bum leg, does he? They sort of took that out of the first movie so I imagine they kept him normally functioning for the second?

I wasn't going to white that out originally.. then I read the comment above me (which wasn't there when I was mass-opening tabs) and thought, oh.. guess some people haven't. XD

Stiger05
11-23-2013, 09:18 AM
Cyia: They showed the hovercrafts taking the bodies away and removing Katniss from the arena

itsmary: I agree. I wish they'd spent a little more time on that. I also wish the District 13 reveal had been a bit more dramatic. Maybe it's because I know the books so I knew it was coming, but it could've used more oomph.

Pushingfordream
11-23-2013, 09:22 AM
I personally loved the books, except third one which sorta disappointed me. I didn't like the movies that much. Catching fire was worth watching, but it was not great.

K.B. Parker
11-23-2013, 09:24 AM
itsmary: I agree. I wish they'd spent a little more time on that. I also wish the .....

They actually showed that part in some promotional spots.

Cyia
11-23-2013, 04:49 PM
I caved and went ahead and watched it.

Loved the movie, HATED the ending. That final shot looked too much like a retread of the "Bella's turning" end scene from Breaking Dawn. Definitely didn't look like a lead in to rebellion.

I wish they'd spent more time on the other tributes. Enobaria was heavily featured in most of the commercials, but she was barely seen in the movie at all. They didn't mention any of Haymitch's backstory, or even mention that he'd already survived a Quarter Quell. I don't think we even saw the male morphling. But I was really amazed by how much the actress playing Mags was able to convey without actually speaking; she was great. (I'm glad they didn't make her death as graphic as it is in the novel.)

London89
11-23-2013, 09:27 PM
Haven't read the books (can't stand 1st person POV), but enjoyed the first film. Looking forward to seeing the sequel, just hope it lives up to the hype of the massive marketing campaign!

:popcorn:

zarada
11-23-2013, 10:18 PM
i read the series four times so far. may do a fifth, we'll see. looking forward to seeing the second movie.

To London89 -- 1st person is ideal when one wants to present the entire plot from a single point of view. it actually makes writing much easier, as it can keep the writer focused on a one-sided perspective, and things tend to flow much faster.

Stiger05
11-24-2013, 01:50 AM
They actually showed that part in some promotional spots.

That sucks. It's kind of a big reveal, you know? They did that with Ender's Game too. Showed a lot in the trailer that was a bit spoilery for anyone who hadn't read the book. : /


I caved and went ahead and watched it.

Loved the movie, HATED the ending. That final shot looked too much like a retread of the "Bella's turning" end scene from Breaking Dawn. Definitely didn't look like a lead in to rebellion.

I wish they'd spent more time on the other tributes. Enobaria was heavily featured in most of the commercials, but she was barely seen in the movie at all. They didn't mention any of Haymitch's backstory, or even mention that he'd already survived a Quarter Quell. I don't think we even saw the male morphling. But I was really amazed by how much the actress playing Mags was able to convey without actually speaking; she was great. (I'm glad they didn't make her death as graphic as it is in the novel.)

I kept hoping for that as well. Some mention of his games. The book spent so much time on how he won--with Katniss rewatching the footage over and over--it was kind of a let down, but there was a lot to cram into a relatively short run time, so I could see that part going to the wayside.

Mags was amazing. That actress did such a great job!

K.B. Parker
11-24-2013, 06:35 AM
Looks like I'm going to have go go ahead and read the first two books before I read Mockingjay.

Channy
11-24-2013, 06:46 AM
I don't know how to go into Catching Fire after learning that Miranda's Magda is Finnick's Mags. Lynn Cohen, who plays Mags, spent the better part of 4 or so years playing Magda in Sex and the City, Miranda's housekeeper who finds her naughty drawer, watched helplessly as the cat was playing with Miranda's son's fallen bellybutton (you had to be there) and threatened her to find a new man by encouraging her to bake more pies.

itsmary
11-25-2013, 07:25 PM
I wasn't going to white that out originally.. then I read the comment above me (which wasn't there when I was mass-opening tabs) and thought, oh.. guess some people haven't. XD
[/COLOR]

Yeah. In the first book, Peeta loses part of his leg, and has a prosthetic for the rest of the series. They cut that from the movie, and he just walks around like normal/isn't really affected by it.

BTW, anyone who hasn't read the books should definitely do so. They're fantastic.



I wish they'd spent more time on the other tributes. Enobaria was heavily featured in most of the commercials, but she was barely seen in the movie at all. They didn't mention any of Haymitch's backstory, or even mention that he'd already survived a Quarter Quell. I don't think we even saw the male morphling. But I was really amazed by how much the actress playing Mags was able to convey without actually speaking; she was great. (I'm glad they didn't make her death as graphic as it is in the novel.)

I would have loved to see Haymitch's Quarter Quell footage. :D

Maggie Maxwell
11-25-2013, 10:19 PM
I would have loved to see Haymitch's Quarter Quell footage. :D

I was really hoping for that. I wanted more details on Haymitch from the books. He's so vital to their survival, and I feel like he keeps getting brushed over in the films. It's disappointing.

Casting couldn't have been more perfect. I loved everyone and thought they all did fantastic jobs (especially Effie). Costuming was incredible and I really want that Mockingjay dress. I was really disappointed by all the details that got left out, though and wouldn't have minded sitting there and extra 15 or 20 minutes so we could have Haymitch's footage, the people fleeing to District 13, and their scores from their various talent demonstrations

Maramoser
11-26-2013, 02:59 AM
I loved it! These movies translate so well to film. I brought my good friend who hasn't read the books, so I consider her something of a litmus test for how gripping the film is to someone who doesn't know the story, and she loved it too. Jennifer Lawrence is a queen and she delivered. I got major chills when they made the announcement that the victors would be in the Quarter Quell (is this a spoiler? lol). Also Effie and Prim had some really good moments that stuck out to me.

I was also struck by how incredibly faithful to the book this was (although admittedly my memory of the book is about 2 years old at this point). It really was like the book was coming to life.

Did anyone else crack up at Snow's greatest line: "They're holding hands. I want them dead"? My friend and I were dying.

aswiftsunset
11-26-2013, 03:59 AM
I thought it was so much better than the first film. First of all, there was no shaky camera work. Second, Buttercup is the correct colour.

I really enjoyed Lawrence's acting. That was the best part of it for me. The final scene was one of my favourite parts, because she said so much with her face. It deviated from the book slightly, but I didn't mind it.

Mags was phenomenal and just as I imagined her. I thought Wiress would be older but I can deal with it. I liked Finnick so much -- and Sam Claflin's American accent was brilliant (he's English). Some good accent training there. Wonder if he just followed Jen and Josh around until he picked up their accent.

I do miss the mockingjay watch of Plutarch's because I think it's an important development. However, Katniss not knowing he was in on the plan was worked out pretty well because of her surprise after the reveal of that little tidbit.

Can we talk about the elevator scene though? All of the faces are priceless!

Edit: Oh, and Cinna's death. I knew it was coming, because I read the books in January 2012, but it was still quite emotional. Katniss's reaction of complete horror...brilliantly acted.

DreamWeaver
11-26-2013, 07:29 AM
I went with a friend to the Thursday double feature of The Hunger Games immediately followed by Catching Fire. Wow. Perfect way to see it.

After ruining The Deathly Hallows Part 1 by re-reading the book just before I saw the movie (and therefore being disappointed when they left bits out or changed them), I deliberately didn't re-read either book beforehand.

The Hunger Games blew me away in a way it hadn't the first time I saw it, and I loved Catching Fire. I thought it definitely had that The Empire Strikes Back vibe. The mockingjay dress alone was worth the price of admission. And the acting was even better than the amazing costuming.

The next day I had to re-read Mockingjay just to complete the experience.

NewKidOldKid
11-26-2013, 08:39 AM
I think it was brilliant. I'm glad the movie was as long as it was (it didn't feel long, though), so they could fit so much of the book in there. I love the books and I'm really happy with the way the movies are following the storyline.

K.B. Parker
11-26-2013, 10:24 AM
You're definitely right about the length. It felt like no more than an hour and a half for me, if even that. That's a testament to how engaging it was.

Persei
11-26-2013, 03:32 PM
I have two observations:

1. People forget that she's "pregnant" (or the movie lacks a scene of other victors pointing out the bs)
2. Her multiplying arrows. In one second she has 3, and in the next, she has 12.

CrastersBabies
11-27-2013, 01:01 AM
I really enjoyed it. Only read the first book because I just did not click with the writing. But loved the first movie and the second. I actually think the second outdid the first.

usuallycountingbats
11-27-2013, 01:23 AM
I thought the second film really was amazing. The first was good but not wow, the second was brilliant, totally brilliant. Why aren't all book adaptations this good? (Yes Mortal Instruments, I'm talking about you).

maggi90w1
11-27-2013, 01:42 PM
1. People forget that she's "pregnant" (or the movie lacks a scene of other victors pointing out the bs)
I don't think the fake pregagncy was important. I read the book almost a year ago and completely forgot about this sub-plot. I was actually surprised they still mentioned it in the movie. It plays no role in the outcome of the movie, so I think it was fine.

Peppermint Bark
11-27-2013, 07:55 PM
That movie was impressive. The director knows how to make movies.

Riveting from start to finish, some nice understated dialogue.

But the ending, I didn't see it coming at all. Once she waited for the lightning to strike I had the big realization.

katiemac
11-27-2013, 09:10 PM
I don't think the fake pregagncy was important. I read the book almost a year ago and completely forgot about this sub-plot. I was actually surprised they still mentioned it in the movie. It plays no role in the outcome of the movie, so I think it was fine.

I think it was okay in the context of the film but this was one section they could have pushed a bit further. If I had not read the books, I'm not sure I would have realized that all of the tributes, by appealing to their Capitol fans in their interviews, were trying to get the games cancelled--or, at the very least, make the Capitol dwellers angry that their "friends" were in danger. Finnick appealing to all his Capitol lovers, the Careers to their "family," etc. None of those worked and neither did Peeta's appeal about her pregnancy. All that sort of faded away once the games began.

GypsyKing
11-28-2013, 02:26 AM
I thought this was a rare occasion where the film was better than the book.

And Catching Fire is my favourite of the Hunger Games series.

I saw the film with one of my mates. He's rather cynical and critical of movies, especially those made from YA novels. He had not read the books, so everything was a surprise and fresh for him. My mate says that he has not been so caught up in a film series since Empire Strikes Back came out thirty years ago.

I'm not quite that old, but I have to agree. It was fantastic. And Jena Malone as Johanna just nailed it for me, especially in the lift.

CrastersBabies
11-28-2013, 10:45 PM
I think it was okay in the context of the film but this was one section they could have pushed a bit further. If I had not read the books, I'm not sure I would have realized that all of the tributes, by appealing to their Capitol fans in their interviews, were trying to get the games cancelled--or, at the very least, make the Capitol dwellers angry that their "friends" were in danger. Finnick appealing to all his Capitol lovers, the Careers to their "family," etc. None of those worked and neither did Peeta's appeal about her pregnancy. All that sort of faded away once the games began.

I "got" this (having not read this book) but felt like it was really underplayed. It was like if I blinked or went to the restroom, I would have completely missed it.

itsmary
11-29-2013, 06:22 AM
I don't think the fake pregagncy was important. I read the book almost a year ago and completely forgot about this sub-plot. I was actually surprised they still mentioned it in the movie. It plays no role in the outcome of the movie, so I think it was fine.

Everyone in Panem still thinks Katniss is pregnant during the Games. It didn't make sense that there's this big uproar when it's announced, then everyone forgets about it once she actually enters the arena. Hopefully they'll at least bring it back in Mockingjay and tell everyone she miscarried, like they did in the book.


I thought the second film really was amazing. The first was good but not wow, the second was brilliant, totally brilliant. Why aren't all book adaptations this good? (Yes Mortal Instruments, I'm talking about you).

I hate to be one of "those" people, but I think a lot more book-to-movie adaptations would be better if they followed the books more closely. I know everyone says that changes have to be made and not everything translates from page to screen. But too many movies leave out whatever it was that made the book so memorable. Part of it is time -- fortunately, both these movies have been close to 3 hours, enough time to fit everything in. But a lot of the time (like in the case of TMI), you have a 500 + page book that has to be crammed in to a 2 hour movie, and there's no way you can tell the story in the way it needs to be told. Hollywood needs to realize that people aren't afraid of long movies, especially long movies that already have a built-in fan base.

Ms_Sassypants
11-29-2013, 10:12 PM
I watched the movie today. Sooooo soooo good. Jennifer Lawrence is an awesome actress! She deserves an Oscar for this.... no, wait, she's already got one!

K.B. Parker
11-30-2013, 09:28 AM
I hate to be one of "those" people, but I think a lot more book-to-movie adaptations would be better if they followed the books more closely. I know everyone says that changes have to be made and not everything translates from page to screen. But too many movies leave out whatever it was that made the book so memorable. Part of it is time -- fortunately, both these movies have been close to 3 hours, enough time to fit everything in. But a lot of the time (like in the case of TMI), you have a 500 + page book that has to be crammed in to a 2 hour movie, and there's no way you can tell the story in the way it needs to be told. Hollywood needs to realize that people aren't afraid of long movies, especially long movies that already have a built-in fan base.

I don't think Hollywood is concerned much with the length of movies keeping audiences away but there is a factor that not many people consider outside of the business.

The longer a film is, the less times it can be shown. A 3 hour movie can only be shown half as many times as an hour and a half movie. They could always open up more screens (like they did here where the movie was the only film showing Thursday and Friday) but that's not something that happens frequently, in fact I've never seen it before.

Some things get left out, for sure. Sometimes they are important scenes othertimes they're not. Sometimes a movie is just terrible. I tend to like film more as a media (I'm a visual guy and I love seeing characters brought to life). However, I think enough films are close enough to their adaptations. I'm going to (finally) read Hunger Games but my imagination is no comparison to Jennifer Lawrence.

DreamWeaver
11-30-2013, 06:10 PM
I admit it--I shopped on Black Friday. Best score: The Hunger Games blu-ray for $7.

zerosystem
12-01-2013, 06:50 AM
I just saw the movie today, and I have to say that it's pretty good. No less than an A- imo. I thought the Hunger Games book was superior to the movie, this time around the movie out did the book. For a movie 2 1/2 hours long, it felt much shorter, which is a good thing. I read the book just before seeing the movie, and there were changes made that I did not mind, and others that I thought brought down some characters, like Katniss' mom. The ending also bothered me. Had I not read the book, I would have been annoyed. Even reading the book, I was also annoyed. But all in all, it was a great movie. I'd say one of the best movie adaptations of a YA novel ever.

angeliz2k
12-01-2013, 05:41 PM
I saw the movie yesterday (I was going to see it Friday, but it was sold out for the entire day when I went to get a ticket at 11:00 in the morning). I enjoyed it a LOT. It was great.

I had two minor quibbles. The "pregnancy" thing was dropped really fast. I was mildly confused, having never read the books. I understood that it was probably a lie, but everyone was freaking out and then . . . nothing. Just a simple line such as Katniss saying, "Thanks for lying for me, Peta," would have fixed it.

My second quibble was the ending. It was anticlimactic. It seemed to stop just short of that moment of closure. Obviously, there are more movies coming, so it can't come to an end, but it needs to at least feel like a complete movie in itself. Catching Fire, I thought, didn't quite do that.

Everything else, however, rocked. I loved the look on Jennifer Lawrence's face in the elevator. Hilarious.

DreamWeaver
12-01-2013, 10:44 PM
My second quibble was the ending. It was anticlimactic. It seemed to stop just short of that moment of closure. This is why it felt like The Empire Strikes Back to me.

Myrealana
12-01-2013, 10:50 PM
Saw it yesterday. My 11-year-old son really, really wanted to watch it, so we took him, though, having read the books, I was a little iffy.

There was a lot of plot there for an 11-year-old to take in, so he got squirmy, which made me notice the length of the film.

I can't help but think THIS is the book that should have been divided into two movies. Then, there would have been more time to develop to characters and clues that kind of got shortchanged.

zerosystem
12-02-2013, 02:49 AM
On of the problems I had with the games portion is that there wasn't a villain I could look to as the primary threat. In the first book and movie, there was Cato, and you knew once they tangled with him, the end was near. This time things were happening so fast and stuff was going on off screen so it was difficult to get a grasp of what was going on. A lot of people in the theatre I was in we're annoyed at the ending, and had I not read the book prior to watching, I would have been one of them.

EMaree
12-02-2013, 04:19 AM
Saw it on Saturday, and really enjoyed it. The time flew by, and I actually teared up during that scene with Mags.

I wasn't a fan of Finnick's actor when he was announced, and he still doesn't 'look' like I imagined him to, but I loved him in this. He was perfect. Johanna too. I wish Wiress and Beetee had more time on-screen, though I understand why it was cut.

They handled Katniss' PTSD perfectly. That gives me a lot of hope for Mockingjay, where I feel like the book wasn't as clear as it should have been at showing how Katniss' actions were due to trauma.

Oh, and... Cinna. Even though I knew it was coming, it still hit me hard. I was slightly surprised they left him 'alive' rather than clearly killing him, which I was sure happened in the book, but I guess they had to keep it ambiguous for that 12A rating.


Can we talk about the elevator scene though? All of the faces are priceless!

That scene was my favourite. :D I think Jennifer Lawrence's personality shone through a bit there.


After ruining The Deathly Hallows Part 1 by re-reading the book just before I saw the movie (and therefore being disappointed when they left bits out or changed them), I deliberately didn't re-read either book beforehand.

The Hunger Games blew me away in a way it hadn't the first time I saw it, and I loved Catching Fire. I thought it definitely had that The Empire Strikes Back vibe. The mockingjay dress alone was worth the price of admission. And the acting was even better than the amazing costuming.

The next day I had to re-read Mockingjay just to complete the experience.

That tip about not re-reading is excellent advice, I'll need to keep that in mind.

The mockingjay dress was stunning.


I think it was brilliant. I'm glad the movie was as long as it was (it didn't feel long, though), so they could fit so much of the book in there. I love the books and I'm really happy with the way the movies are following the storyline.


You're definitely right about the length. It felt like no more than an hour and a half for me, if even that. That's a testament to how engaging it was.

Definitely agree about the length being spot-on. I'd have happily watched another fifteen minutes, but I am super impressed with how well they paced it.


On of the problems I had with the games portion is that there wasn't a villain I could look to as the primary threat. In the first book and movie, there was Cato, and you knew once they tangled with him, the end was near. This time things were happening so fast and stuff was going on off screen so it was difficult to get a grasp of what was going on. A lot of people in the theatre I was in we're annoyed at the ending, and had I not read the book prior to watching, I would have been one of them.

This bothered me as well--the Careers were set-up as the threat, but they got almost no screen time at all. They never felt like something to be scared of. Johanna and Finnick felt a lot more like threats.

Also I'm fairly sure neither movie has bothered to explain what Careers are for those who haven't read the books, which is odd. Though I think Catching Fire might have had a very quick line explaining it when Haymitch was showing them the other victors.

tertia
12-02-2013, 03:44 PM
I thought this was a rare occasion where the film was better than the book.

I felt this way about the Hunger Games too, and it was certainly true for Catching Fire. I think a story like this really benefits from being told in something other than the first person; getting to see some of the inner-workings of the Capitol (like President Snow and Plutarch's exchanges) adds much more depth to what's going on.

I also agree that the casting and acting was spot on. Book Katniss irritated me, but Jennifer Lawrence brings such a strong personality to the character that it's hard not to love her.

Overall, a great, entertaining film!

zerosystem
12-05-2013, 07:35 AM
I felt this way about the Hunger Games too, and it was certainly true for Catching Fire. I think a story like this really benefits from being told in something other than the first person; getting to see some of the inner-workings of the Capitol (like President Snow and Plutarch's exchanges) adds much more depth to what's going on.

I also agree that the casting and acting was spot on. Book Katniss irritated me, but Jennifer Lawrence brings such a strong personality to the character that it's hard not to love her.

Overall, a great, entertaining film!
I did not mind the first person storytelling in the first book, but the more I read Catching Fire, the more annoyed I was with Katniss. Not having to know her inner thoughts was a plus in this movie.