Image by Marco-willy from Pixabay Over a decade ago, Lionsgate kicked off the “YA dystopian” craze of the 2010s wherein film studios sought to make hundreds of millions of dollars off of teenage moviegoers wanting to see their favorite young-adult novels adapted for the silver screen. From Gavin Hood’s Ender’s Game and Phillip Noyce’s The Giver to the Divergent and The Maze Runner franchises, this formula seemed to bring moderate commercial success (yet mixed critical reception) to studios willing to fund these efforts.
And yet, more than ten years later, only Lionsgate’s original effort remains part of the cultural zeitgeist: The Hunger Games! After four box-office hits based on the trilogy of novels by Suzanne Collins, this sci-fi action series is back with a big-screen take on the 2020 prequel novel “The Ballad of Songbirds and Snakes” this weekend. As such, what better time to re-examine The Hunger Games movie franchise to see how well it holds up? So, without further ado…LET’S GET STARTED! The Hunger Games (2012) Admittedly, I haven’t seen most of the contemporary successors to the first film in The Hunger Games series (only Ender’s Game, which I didn’t love). So, I lack much of an accurate metric to measure it with against the rest of its genre. That being said, I firmly believe that the first entry in this franchise, directed by Gary Ross (Seabiscuit, Ocean’s 8), is a pretty good movie. But not great. Perhaps the biggest strength of 2012’s The Hunger Games is how the competent worldbuilding does not overwhelm audiences or drag down its central narrative. By relying on production design and dialogue to give the viewer enough information to feel emotionally invested in the titular battle royale, Ross’s directing manages to keep the story first and the franchise-building second. While this more stripped-down, simplistic approach keeps the film from achieving greatness, I think it was necessary to introduce those unfamiliar with the books to the dystopian society of Panem (and how our protagonist’s life fits within it) by minimizing the political machinations at this point in the overarching story (fortunately, that comes in the sequel). All of these movies (but especially this first one) rely on the talents & chemistry of its cast to elevate the material to something greater than what one might expect from a YA novel. As the heart of this particular story revolves around the burgeoning romance of charmless fighter Katniss Everdeen (Jennifer Lawrence) and the reliably charismatic Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutcherson), I found myself more invested in their growing bond than I figured I would be. While Hutcherson does a good enough job making Peeta sympathetic, I wasn’t necessarily drawn to his performance. Lawrence, on the other hand, is a powerfully magnetic actress whose casting as our reluctant heroine is about as perfect as you can get. Not only does she effortlessly pull off Katniss’ more badass moments, what she arguably does best here is engross the viewer in her story in spite of how standoffish her personality can be at times. That is a testament to her incredible talents, and how she plays off of Hutcherson (mostly) makes up for how the more political aspects of the story centered on the behind-the-scenes manipulations of President Coriolanus Snow (Donald Sutherland) are set dressing in this movie. Of course, Katniss and Peeta’s traumatic love story is the focal point of the titular battle royale-turned-bloodbath involving teenagers pitted against one another in a fight to the death. Aside from Lawrence and Hutcherson, I think the standout amongst the child actors is 13-year-old Amandla Stenberg as the mischievous tree-climber Rue. The female tribute from District 11 and a foil for Katniss’ younger sister Primrose “Prim” Everdeen (Willow Shields), Stenberg injects some much-needed humanity during the height of the Games while also helping to make Katniss more likeable by bringing out her nurturing & protective self. And, of course, Rue’s tragic death is a very memorable catalyst for (arguably) the rest of the series as it’s the inciting event which motivates Katniss to do more than just survive the Games but to prove (alongside Peeta) that the tributes refuse to die simply for sport. Amongst the adult cast, Woody Harrelson kills it as the alcoholic mentor Haymitch Abernathy that you love too much to truly ever hate. Obviously, he has charm emanating from every ounce of his body whenever he’s in a scene. But, more importantly, his character feels real enough in that he gives solid advice to Katniss and Peeta and somewhat redeems himself during the Games while always remaining true to who he is deep down: an asshole. 😊 Aside from Harrelson, though, I have a massive soft spot for Cinna (Lenny Kravitz), Katniss’ main stylist who has a big old heart by seeming genuinely upset that he has to be the first one to apologize to Katniss for the situation she’s found herself in. Ultimately, its all of these actors (just to name a few) who keep the plot-heavy narrative from being too bogged down with boring exposition or mindless action sequences. Overall, The Hunger Games is a fairly solid start to this film franchise. To be clear, not all of the younger actors pull off what Lawrence and Stenberg can (although I mostly blame it on some of the writing). However, its handful of weaknesses are largely overshadowed by its sheer entertainment value & endearing potential to become something greater than the sum of its parts. Simply put, rewatching this film made me even more excited to dive into the sequels. The Hunger Games: Catching Fire (2013) After Gary Ross decided not to direct the sequel to his film The Hunger Games due to scheduling conflicts, Francis Lawrence (I Am Legend, Water for Elephants) takes the helm of the rest of the franchise (much like David Yates did for the Harry Potter series). And I think it’s hard to argue (having not yet seen his newest addition, The Ballad of Songbirds & Snakes) that his first outing adapting Suzanne Collins’ novels remains his best. Simply put, Catching Fire is not just a great Hunger Games movie. It’s a great movie. Say what you will about Lawrence’s direction in the later films, but he does damn good job at pacing this 2013 sequel with an effectively apt balance of intense action & poignant character moments. Furthermore, he fully takes advantage of the more mature narrative from Collins’ middle entry in her original trilogy by relying on his very talented actors to invest the audience in this increasingly political drama. Maybe not everyone liked this turn, but I found myself fully enthralled by how much Catching Fire expanded upon the straightforward “teen battle royale” of the first movie. Instead, the Games themselves (just like pretty much the rest of the narrative) serve the larger story about planting the seeds of revolution while keeping our heroine completely in the dark about it. Much of the engrossing nature of Catching Fire comes from the tense, yet oddly & mutually respectful, dynamic between Katniss and President Snow. From there first scene together, Lawrence & Sutherland elevate one another’s performances to shine in different yet equally compelling ways. Whereas Sutherland’s decades of experience as a thespian allow for a smirk or look utterly terrifying (and thus sufficiently villainous), Lawrence really comes into her own as an emotionally intimidating character whose fiercely principled nature causes her to butt heads with virtually everyone in her life. And that makes for some great character drama. Even more impressive, though, is that this twisted, subject-ruler relationship remains some of the most enticing character-driven fodder in the entire franchise. Of course, the first Hunger Games flick had pretty good lead actors, too. Unlike its predecessor, however, Catching Fire lets most of the supporting cast really shine. Coming off of being “whelmed” by Josh Hutcherson in the first movie, I was pretty impressed by how much better he was at injecting genuine tenderness into Peeta to match the natural charisma that he emanates in the role. Certainly, his intentional performance helped invest me even further in his burgeoning romance with Katniss (which makes where their story goes in the latter two films even more devastating). Of course, Woody Harrelson is as reliably entertaining as ever despite being a little more restrained in his performance than in the previous film (although that move makes sense due to his changing dynamic with Katniss & how deceptive he is the whole time). I didn’t mention Stanley Tucci at all when discussing The Hunger Games, and that was wrong of me. 😊 He KILLED it, and continues that stride here as the Capitol’s mouthpiece & prime entertainer Caesar Flickerman. He uses just the right amount of cheese to pull off the heightened nature of his character as emblematic of the Games’ “reality TV” elements. But another returning cast member that I ended up liking even more the second time around was someone who, in my humble opinion, was underused in the first movie: Elizabeth Banks as Effie Trinket. In Catching Fire, she nails the handful of emotional moments she gets (namely, when she pulls Katniss’ name at the Reaping and her emotional apology the night before the Games). By doing so, Banks strips away the character’s synthetic façade & makes Effie feel like a real person despite her seemingly shallow personality. And I have to give praise to Lenny Kravitz once again in his, unfortunately, final appearance as Cinna. Like Banks, Kravitz does as much as he can with his minimal screen time by remaining Katniss’ most ardent supporter. On top of that, though, his raw, brutal & emotional exit just as the Games kick off gets me choked up whenever I watch it. These returning actors alone make Catching Fire the best film of the franchise. But we get even MORE incredible performers for their first appearances in the franchise. Easily, the standout newbie is the late Phillip Seymour Hoffman as Plutarch Heavensbee, the new Head Gamemaker/double agent for the blossoming rebellion. Perhaps no other actor besides Hoffman (may he rest in peace) could’ve kept the audience seeing Catching Fire for the first time so much on their toes about where his true loyalties lie. Yet, Hoffman gives an incredibly subdued performance that elevates this franchise higher than it perhaps ever deserved to be. Beyond Hoffman, though, I enjoyed pretty much all of the veteran tributes who became Katniss & Peeta’s allies in the Games. Sam Claflin is effortlessly charming as Finnick Odair, not just for his magnetic physique but also how fiercely protective he is of his elderly mentor Mags Flanagan (Lynn Cohen) whose sacrifice was surprisingly affecting. Even more over-the-top, yet deliciously so, than Claflin is Jena Malone as the ferocious & rage-filled Johanna Mason whose emotional shield goes down only a handful of times to tremendous effect. Through her performance, the audience starts to realize just how furious the tributes are at President Snow for forcing them back into the Games. And, of course, I have to shine a spotlight on Jeffrey Wright’s efficient and reserved genius Beetee who does some really good work as a character than can come off as nothing more than a plot device. Need I say more? Catching Fire is an exceptional political thriller that raises the stakes for these characters by leaning fully into Collins’ political commentary about the nature of power. Yet, director Francis Lawrence doesn’t let you forget why the Hunger Games movies are a solid action franchise. If I haven’t yet convinced you that it’s both a sequel that improves upon the original while also a standout young-adult movie of the last decades, I’m not sure what I could say to do so. The Hunger Games: Mockingjay – Part 1 (2014) Very recently, Francis Lawrence expressed regret about splitting “Mockingjay,” Suzanne Collins’ conclusion to her original “The Hunger Games” trilogy, into two movies á la the Harry Potter franchise.[1] I remember seeing both of these movies in the theater when they originally released, and even back then (as a barely-legal adult just starting college lacking any kind of knowledge about the art of filmmaking) I felt the narrative being stretched out between Part 1 and Part 2. Thus, I was concerned about how both movies would hold up upon a rewatch. What I’ll stress right out of the gate is this: the two Mockingjay movies are, in my humble opinion, the worst Hunger Games movies (at the time of writing this, I haven’t seen The Ballad of Songbirds & Snakes). That being said, I still enjoyed them & think they’re well-made overall. Let’s begin with the positives of Part 1. While the “battle royale” concept served up some good, old-fashioned entertainment in the first two movies, I appreciated this film’s shift to focusing more on politics & character drama almost exclusively. Instead of the Games driving a good chunk of the plot, Katniss is thrown into the politicking of the underground resistance centered on the ruins of District 13 led by President Alma Coin (Julianne Moore). Furthermore, the intriguing “cat-and-mouse” dynamic between Katniss and Snow remains just as good (if not as front-and-center) as it was in Catching Fire. As always, Jennifer Lawrence gives a commendable performance as Katniss. While I do think her scenes involve just a little too much crying for my taste, she pulls off the conflicted emotions of the heroine by ensuring that Katniss’ vulnerable side shines through more so than in the previous two flicks. In particular, how the narrative relies on humanizing Katniss for political purposes with propaganda & the “commercialization” of war makes for some interesting dynamics between Katniss and the adults around her telling her that they know what’s best for her. Fortunately, however, Lawrence isn’t the only younger actor given some good stuff to chew on here. Without a doubt, the “most improved” in this movie compared to his first two appearances is Liam Hemsworth as Gale Hawthorne. He had his moments at the whipping post in Catching Fire (yet was given virtually nothing to do in the first movie), but it’s in this movie that Gale finally feels like a relatable character & an engaging part of Katniss’ inner circle. I was especially fond of his monologue atop the charred remains of innocent people left in the wake of the Capitol’s bombing of District 12. While I didn’t shed a tear, I really appreciated the focus on Gale’s unique relationship with Katniss being the focus here. It was a refreshing change of pace from the emphasis on Katniss & Peeta’s romance in the first two movies. My final big positive applies to both Mockingjay flicks. I liked that this story (credit to Suzanne Collins) really turns the franchise from a YA survival thriller into a political drama that explores the moral complexities & ambiguities of war and revolutionary change. Is the writing a bit on the nose at times? Of course, but it doesn’t take away from the important questions raised about whether civilian casualties are worth the “greater good” or the irony of propaganda’s artificiality being able to evoke such genuine & powerful emotions from those who consume it. Again, this ain’t no Argo or Lincoln. But it’s a decent political story that remains entertaining on the whole. Unfortunately, this being a true “part one” of a two-part (really three-part) story causes the film to have some significant drawbacks. A big complaint that I have with both Mockingjay movies relates to how big the cast has grown. While most of these characters get a few good moments here or there, I never felt that Julianne Moore got a single scene to fully come out of her shell & inject some life into President Coin as the subversive antagonist of the third act of Collins’ trilogy. Not only does her character lack the dramatic heft of Sutherland’s President Snow (who also feels shortchanged in these movies compared to his magnetic presence in Catching Fire), but Moore’s writing & dialogue comes off as “show, don’t tell” to a detriment. Aside from Coin, however, some other great actors introduced in Part 1 are, in my humble opinion, utterly wasted given the amount of talent dripping from them in other projects. Notably, Mahershala Ali’s role as glorified personal bodyguard Boggs rings hallow (and it’s not Ali’s fault one bit) while Natalie Dormer of Game of Thrones fame is mostly forgettable as propaganda film director/archetypical “tough girl” Cressida (again, not Dormer’s fault). Even many of the returning actors, like Harrelson and Hoffman (who have roles in the main plot), feel shoved aside in favor of shooting Jennifer Lawrence cry a lot. Ultimately, though, the biggest problem of Part 1 is with its pacing. I’m certainly not the first person to highlight this particular issue with the film, but I think it’s worth re-stating here: it’s a rather slow & unengaging story. I personally chalk most of this up to the fact that, once again, it’s the first of three acts. Still, the lack of forward momentum (while helping some of the quieter scenes breathe – notably Katniss singing “The Hanging Tree”) does little to make the start of a full-throated rebellion have much jolt to it. Would I have rather watched a three-hour epic version of the “Mockingjay” book that sped up the pacing & made every scene feel urgent to the overarching narrative of a change in the hierarch of power in Panem? Yup. But, that’s not what we got. And I’ll defend Part 1 as a decent movie, but not all that good. The Hunger Games: Mockingjay – Part 2 (2015) Now we come to the official end of the Hunger Games franchise. Well, at the least the end of Katniss’ story. And, to be honest, it’s a pretty satisfying conclusion regarding how surprising certain story choices are. Yet, it’s also a bit disappointing given how anticlimactic other choices feel. As with Part 1, let’s start with the positives of Part 2. While I still don’t think Julianne Moore ever got a super effective moment (like in Part 1), I found the subplot about President Coin going full-on Machiavellian with her exploiting (and then being intimidated by) Katniss for her own political gains to be an effective subversion of audience expectations. Even if you’ve read Collins’ book, the way in which director Francis Lawrence captures Katniss’ slow-burn realization that Coin is gradually transforming into the “next Snow”—a tyrant in all but name—helps the shocking climax of her death pretty satisfying. Thematically speaking, that along with the continued examination of war’s brutality (while by no means original) helps maintain the philosophical weight of this story & reminds the viewer how much better these YA dystopian movies are than they have any right to be. Speaking of surprising twists, I always really enjoyed the idea AND execution of the 76th Hunger Games. Essentially the Capitol’s way to make literal war out of entertainment, I can appreciate some viewers feeling that it’s a bridge too far compared to the (ever so slightly) more subtle political allegory of the Games being a “battle royale” on national television. However, I find it just campy enough in concept while feeling gritty & grounded in execution to work. I especially appreciate the zombie-horror vibes of the scene involving the “mutts” in the sewers (which gave Finnick a solidly terrifying yet sacrificial death) & the sheer dehumanizing use of the “black goo”. Scenes like this, in my humble opinion, effectively demonstrate the extreme lengths that Snow is willing to go to hold onto his power. Even as it slowly slips through his fingers. Like with the other movies that came before it, Part 2 also has some good character stuff thanks to the actors who know these characters pretty well at this point. Without a doubt, Lawrence remains a great actress as she caps off Katniss’ journey in a realistically bittersweet way. Not only does she remain traumatized by her experiences (which, of course, she would be if all this shit actually happened to her), but the loss of her younger sister Prim & the end of her friendship with Gale fittingly adds to her pretty tragic ending. Yes, she survives the Games and Snow’s machinations. But she will forever be mentally haunted & emotionally scarred by the events of this story for the rest of her life. Not a fairy-tale ending by any means, but that fits this particular story if you ask me. I imagine some people don’t agree with this, but I found Peeta’s ending & use in this film to be pretty fitting, too. While he was mostly contained to interviews with Caesar Flickerman in Part 1, he reunites with Katniss & the others in Part 2 in a way that adds suspense to the mission of infiltrating the Capitol. He remains a ticking time-bomb ready to blow any second for the majority of the second & third act, yet Josh Hutcherson does well enough with the material to keep me engaged with where his headspace is at in any given moment. That being said, I personally think that the way his story ends is one of the less unrealistic aspects of the film’s ending (all I’m saying is…Katniss probably would’ve ended up marrying & having a family with Gale because they lived through SIXTEEN YEARS of life together while having more than shared trauma to bond over. Just my opinion 😊). When it comes to our two political leaders, I liked how the parallels between Snow and Coin were drawn. While neither Sutherland nor Moore ever got much time to shine in Part 2, I appreciated the subtext about how tyranny cannot be supplanted by something like tyranny but rather must be completely stripped away & replaced with an entirely new system if it’s going to have the chance to be permanently eradicated. Unfortunately, I don’t have much more positive to say about Part 2. Like its immediate predecessor (and even the first movie, to some extent), the writing sometimes falls flat here. While I found some of Katniss’ decisions emotionally justified (most obviously her assassination of President Coin), they also feel utterly reckless given the fact that she’s surrounded by several sensible adults (and even younger peers) who could’ve & should’ve prevented it. Maybe they just silently went along with it, but this small detail being overlooked causes the story choice to not feel wholly earned. Furthermore, her completely writing off Gale after Prim’s death because he might have known about it came off as one of the only times in the narrative that Katniss seemed to fit within a stereotypical mold of romantic storytelling. As I hinted at earlier, the sensible and more realistic decision would be to let time heal any wounds with Gale and, ultimately, consummate her love for him. Instead, though, she succumbs to the supposed love she fostered with Peeta as the by-product of shared trauma. This, in my humble opinion, does a great disservice to the character who (in a good sense) never truly felt like a female protagonist lacking agency or intelligence. This resolution to the love triangle, however, is just that. But the biggest sin of Part 2 (but really both Mockingjay films) is how many actors feel wasted in this two-part conclusion to the main Hunger Games series. The veteran actors, like Woody Harrelson and Elizabeth Banks, are shoved aside & get only a handful of scenes to send them off. The tributes we met in Catching Fire, such as Jeffrey Wright’s Beetee and Jena Malone’s Johanna, have no interesting presence in the plot or character dynamics. Like I mentioned earlier, Sam Claflin has some decent action moments as Finnick but that does little to make up for how ultimately forgettable his character is. Even more so, though, I felt virtually no emotional investment in his relationship with fellow former tribute Annie Cresta (Stef Dawson) because no time was really given to it. Once again, Mahershala Ali’s turn as Boggs (even during his death scene) falls flat at no fault of his own but due to how swiftly in the story he’s taken out. And Natalie Dormer’s Cressida survives the war, but has so much exposition-heavy dialogue that she’s more of a plot device than a compelling member of the cast. While I appreciated the emotional moments from Elden Henson (of Daredevil fame) as the mute cameraman Pollux, his brother Castor’s (Wes Chatham) death didn’t hit as much as Rue’s death in the first movie or Cinna’s death in Catching Fire because there was never much attention given to that relationship in the first place. And then there’s the other wasted talent of this cast. In his final film performance, Philip Seymour Hoffman remains understated to a fault (although his smirk in the execution scene was pretty awesome). Stanley Tucci ends his time as Caesar Flickerman with a whimper because, unlike Banks’ Effie, we never get a single moment humanizing him or bringing retribution for his complicity in President Snow’s political games. Worst of all, though, Donald Sutherland’s very minimal screen time in this movie should make his final moments with Katniss & his iconic death preciously impactful. Instead, he seemed like he was over the role & just read some lines to sound villainous rather than the smart, cunning & dutifully honest antagonist that we saw in Catching Fire. I’ll say it again. The two Mockingjay movies should’ve just been a single, epic action flick/political thriller. Imagine a world where the Hunger Games movies were in the conversation of “best cinematic trilogies of all time.” While many people would disagree with such a possibility, I remain sad that we’ll never know how fun that meaningless debate could have been like. Still, Part 2 is a decent enough end to this main story. Now, the question is, can The Ballad of Songbirds & Snakes be a return to form for the franchise? The Hunger Games: The Ballad of Songbirds & Snakes (2023) [NOTE: This blog contains spoilers for “The Ballad of Songbirds & Snakes.” You have been warned.] Having read Suzanne Collins’ prequel novel to the “Hunger Games” trilogy of books about a year ago, I went into Songbirds & Snakes expecting an adequately-made blockbuster with a somewhat underwhelming story & an overly long third act. Certainly, some people (critics and general audiences alike) leaving the theater after seeing this movie are feeling that way. However, I found it to work better than I anticipated in spite of its flaws. Thinking about the core of the narrative, Songbirds & Snakes is a well-done example of the villain being the hero of their own story. To be clear, director Francis Lawrence and writers Michael Lesslie & Michael Arndt never really try to make the audience fall in love with its protagonist, the ambitious teenager Coriolanus Snow (Tom Blyth). Much like other stories of this nature (Joker comes to mind), the movie very effectively paces out Snow’s descent by making him feel neither pure good or pure evil but rather just a human being. Thanks to Blyth’s more-than-competent approach to the material, the audience is sympathetic to the plight of Snow and his family—protective cousin Tigris (Hunter Schafer) and patriotic matriarch Grandma’am (Fionnula Flanagan)—due to his underdog story of wanting to use the tenth annual Games to re-establish the prestige of the Snow name. However, as the Games themselves (specifically Snow’s morally questionable methods to help his tribute) unfold, the character’s darker impulses & selfish worldview really start to shine through. Thus, by the time we see his unforgiveable betrayal of best friend Sejanus Plinth (Josh Andrés Rivera) in District 12 in the third act, Snow’s arc feels complete & satisfying without making too many overt connections to or ties with the four Hunger Games flicks that came before. Elevating Blyth’s take on the franchise’s villain made noteworthy by Donald Sutherland, we have our female lead: the female District 12 tribute with a beautiful voice & soul, Lucy Gray Baird (Rachel Zegler). Obviously, she is the “songbird” to Snow’s “snake” in terms of her innocence & moral righteousness that’s sharply contrasted with his ruthless pragmatism. While a bit on the nose, the chemistry (romantic or otherwise) between Blyth and Zegler serves as the heart of Songbirds & Snakes by making Snow’s inability to give up his political aspirations in favor of true love tragic & simultaneously deserved. Furthermore, the fact that Zegler fully embraces how different Lucy Gray is from Katniss Everdeen makes the central story refreshing & unique compared to the rest of the franchise. It helps the viewer delineate the fact that she’s not the main character of this story (albeit an important one), despite being a resilient & intelligent survivor like the “Girl on Fire.” To the film’s benefit, this is Snow’s story first and foremost. Fortunately, Blyth’s performance is surrounded by a top-tier supporting cast with (in my humble opinion) three particular actors to highlight for pretty different reasons. To begin with Viola Davis, whose deliciously evil take on Snow’s morally bankrupt mentor easily makes her the most memorable Head Gamemaker of all the Hunger Games flicks. Not only that, but how she embodies Snow’s limitless desire to remain in the Capitol & embroil himself in Panem politics on his climb up the ladder of power adds substance to his own descent into villainy. Another campy, yet admirable & fun, performance comes from Jason Schwartzman as Lucretius “Lucky” Flickerman (presumably the ancestor of Stanley Tucci’s zany Caesar Flickerman). During the very intense & dour second act, Schwartzman’s pitch-perfect delivery & comedic timing injects some much-needed levity to seeing the tributes mercilessly slaughtering one another in the arena. But the biggest surprise for me (other than Blyth, who I was wholly unfamiliar with beforehand), was Peter Dinklage. As Snow’s antagonist & co-creator of the Games (alongside Snow’s dead father Crassus), Dean Casca Highbottom is a more subdued character than I’m familiar seeing Dinklage play (especially compared to his turn in Game of Thrones). His talents, however, were not at all shocking & I found the slow-burn nature of revealing the reasons behind his vendetta for Snow (as well as his obvious drug addiction) to be one of the most emotionally satisfying aspects of the narrative outside of Snow’s story itself. While there are plenty of good actors doing good work here, I also greatly appreciated the technical aspects & efforts of the crew of Songbirds & Snakes. As his fourth directorial outing with this franchise, Francis Lawrence is as self-assured as ever in fleshing out Suzanne Collins’ dystopian world while also telling a compelling, character-driven story. In particular, the use of the camera by cinematographer Jo Willems (a frequent collaborator of Lawrence’s) was consistently intimate. Profound & emotional during the quieter character moments (particularly scenes between Snow and Lucy Gray) while being inspired & immersive during the combat scenes, Willems made the Games more terrifying than ever before. This approach to the camerawork added to the film’s retro-dystopian production design. Clearly, Lawrence approached the look of Songbirds & Snakes as constructing a historical drama within the context of Panem & the aesthetic of District 12 that was established in the other Hunger Games flicks. From the reliance on constructed sets for the Academy & battle arena to the viewing room with old-school TVs, the world in this film feels fittingly stripped down and raw. The scars of the Rebellion against the Capitol are fresh in the industrial design of the buildings & symbolism of the bombed Games arena. This helps the residents of the Capitol (namely Snow’s social circle & teachers) seem somewhat justified in their fierce defense of the Games continuing and/or hatred of the people in the Districts. Probably the biggest unsung (pun intended 😊) hero of Songbirds & Snakes is the score. While somewhat overshadowed by Zegler’s amazing singing voice, James Newton Howard (another artist returning from the prior Hunger Games flicks) successfully creates emotional & thematic for the story. Yet, it never overwhelms by being excessive nor distracts from the story happening on screen. In my humble opinion, a good score can either be the focal point of any scene or feel almost faded in the background. And Howard’s music in this movie certainly falls into the latter category, which works overall with this kind of dark, character-drive drama. While I don’t think it’s a perfect movie (the third act’s a bit too long), Songbirds & Snakes is a solid blockbuster & prequel to 2012’s The Hunger Games. Having read Collins’ original novel upon which the film is based, I found the story following Lucy Gray’s victory in the Games worked better as the final hour of a two-and-a-half-hour movie than as the last third of a 150,000+ word book. As such, the movie ultimately does what it set out to do: tell a fully-realized & effective story about the creation of President Snow as we knew him in the 2010s. At the end of the day, that’s really all I could ask for going into the theater last night. Overall, what are my thoughts on the Hunger Games franchise? Honestly, I enjoy all of it. Some movies are individually better than others (see my ranking below), it’s a pretty solid series of films overall. Do I need another one anytime soon? No, but if Collins writes another book & we do get another Hunger Games movie in the next ten years, I’m confident that it will be just as good as the rest of the franchise while hoping that it hits the heights of its best flicks. With all that said, here is my official ranking of the five Hunger Games movies:
What is your favorite Hunger Games film? Would you like to see another prequel, a sequel, or nothing from this franchise going forward? What opinions of mine do you find absolutely ridiculous? Let me know in the comments below. Until next time, this has been… Yours Truly, Amateur Analyst [1] https://people.com/hunger-games-director-regrets-splitting-mockingjay-two-parts-exclusive-8356372
0 Comments
|
Austin McManusI have no academic or professional background in film production or criticism; I simply love watching and talking about movies. Archives
May 2024
Categories
All
|