The Hunger Games: Catching Fire (2013)

  • Time: 146 min
  • Genre: Action | Adventure | Sci-Fi
  • Director: Francis Lawrence
  • Cast: Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, Liam Hemsworth


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.


  • It wasn’t supposed to be this way . ” The Hunger Games : Catching Fire ” was ready to surprise , outperforming its predecessor. Not unlike the expectations of “Kick- Ass 2 ” , which ultimately ended up being good but not quite. Although the saga of the great Jennifer Lawrence would not be the next ” Lord of the Rings” (it’s a different genre ) , undoubtedly has a load of epic. The sense of continuity from the first part of ” The Hunger Games ” was closed : the players had won the deadly game and awarded a life full of fortune was made ​​. They had not to fight more and , therefore, all that remained of them was get old and resume their lives . But since the release of the original film with its open end , added to which is based on a book series , the viewer anticipating that would become a trilogy or saga, so the following “Catching Fire ” should open that closed sense to continue to make it a epic : it is no longer a mortal cinch , but a revolution and uprising of the oppressed against the Capitol. Instead , they conceived an undisguised commercial product

    During the first, ” The Hunger Games : Catching Fire ” shares some of the errors of the first part, but attenuated : first the aesthetics of some characters ( as is ” Running Man”) . It’s a kind of “A Clockwork Orange ” but modern , ie the mixture of classicism / today. Stanley Tucci freed his blue wig, but Elizabeth Banks still retains its facade over – produced . In “A Clockwork Orange ” was elegant and subtle the classic in the modern world , but Banks is closer to a bizarre cross between Nicki Minaj and Lady Gaga. For a film that pretends to be important, it is a slap .

    The second problem is the strength of the script , which is very didactic explaining things , putting sentences with forceps (eg repeats the word “hope ” so that the viewer do not fit doubt that they are suffering, or when they tell the winners ”you are now distracting them” referring to the village) . The problem with literal forcefulness is accidentally grated into ridicule and condescension : listen to the “bad guys ” tells the plan of Lawrence downfall seems childish , because you have to believe : it is impossible that they thinks “literally” a girl that sacrificed in the previous game is so silly now betraying its spirit and massacre their peers in the deadly game . So also is foolish to believe that the people will always distracted by injustice through a love story about a couple. Elizabeth Banks suffers from similarly ridiculous : it is not the fault of the actress but her dialogues in the erect position of pretense and hypocrisy , but it is very obvious . Simply the viewer already knows the role of Banks false – position when District people face looks with resignation. At least in her favor you can save that in her last moments of presence is humanized : she tells the players who truly regrets what happens

    But where ” The Hunger Games ” is beginning to stumble past the initial 40 minutes, which is where it comes in line with the first part. A critic once said that ” The Hunger Games ” could well be a communist allegory. Still the meaning is not lost : this is based on a desire for equality of districts with the Capitol through the games ( in Russia , were peripheral countries at the Olympic Games ) . Not crazy totalitarian assumption to see worried faces , resigned districts , and as the head of the Capitol want to exterminate this “species” , plus a public execution in the film. All these steps may – consciously or not – rebuild imagery of the Russian revolution , the French , the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising , the partisan resistance , the fascist regime or even the incredible ferocity of the Stalinist regime , etc. .

    But instead of paying attention to rebellion, ” The Hunger Games : Catching Fire ” in the next hour cloned portions of its predecessor : play a game again , again should get allies , one more time survival , training, etc. . There are some details here and there, and several accelerated things for no rating as an exact repetition , but fails to modify the heated substance. Not only betrays the rules of film ( it turns out that can put together a vassalage , which no aware public, and breaks the belief of a life of fortune for the winners of the original Hunger Games , so it is a Deus Ex Machina pushing the argument and that means back to swallow more of the same ), but much of the material from ” Catching Fire ” is interchangeable with the predecessor: for example here is a poisonous fog that itches in hand and arm to Lawrence, which replaces poisonous wasps -first part- also stung in the arm to Lawrence! Entertains … but disappointed , too. At one point we heard that the game vassalage be worse than the original game, but one comes to the conclusion that there is nothing impressive here asserting that statement

    Perhaps the error of ” The Hunger Games : Catching Fire ” is the audience : the franchise quickly became a huge phenomenon , whereby one believed that now then was the time of the rebellion and epic battles , The style of Helm’s Deep “Lord of The Rings: The Two Towers .” Instead, it is a sequel in the strict term : a repetition of the formula of ” The Hunger Games ” without being better or worse. The conclusion also leaves an open door which claims that in the next adventure will be the control collapse of the Capitol. If this is true , if the third installment of ” The Hunger Games ” will be so great , then “Catching Fire ” has less likely to survive over time: the casual fan can see the first part , skip this and go straight to third part, because here too there is no relevant information to be indispensable . “Catching Fires ” should be enjoyed from entertainment and therefore qualifies three-and-half stars out of five, but does not hold either individually or together

    – See more at:

  • Honestly, I was disappointed… While the first “Hunger Games” movie was successful in so many ways, this one was boring, over-long, slow and annoying. Absolutely nothing happens for the first 1 hour and 15 minutes. When the movie started getting more action-oriented at first I hoped it would be more interesting, but even the action sequences were a drag. It just felt like they were filling time as they kept throwing all these contrived traps at the contestants. Lack of imagination and creativity is what lacked in this film. Only in the final moments of the film was their even a suggestion that a new idea might be introduced. And then only to end suddenly and abruptly in a cliffhanger. The movie reminds me of “Battle Royale”, but it’s kind of a bad remake… I do not recommend it at all, unless you need a nap.

  • The Hunger Games: Catching Fire 9/10- Many people were skeptical about Lionsgate’s decision to bring Francis Lawrence as the new director to the widely anticipated sequel. In my opinion, they made a perfect choice. His style gave the film a whole new light that only made the movie better.

    The movie itself was made tremendously. They were able to show the Victory Tour in a very nice view that is how many people envisioned it when they read the book. The design for each District could not have been better even though we only saw a few seconds of each district. The arena was made incredibly. The design of the cornucopia and the water and forest surrounding it was amazing. The design of introducing each lethal part of the forest was done fabulously. All in all, the movie, in my opinion could not have been better.

    It is amazing to see how all of the young actors grew with their acting over such a short time. Liam Hemsworth’s was given much more screen time in the new movie and he used every minute to his advantage. He really showed who Gale is in the Hunger Games. Liam Hemsworth’s performance added very much to this movie. Josh Hutcherson is the perfect Peeta. Although his performance did not improve a whole lot from the first movie to the second, no one could have done a better job. Now we come to Jennifer Lawrence. She delivered an amazing performance that is worth praise. Her performance multiplied by ten from the first to second movie. Her ability to bring out how Katniss really is in the books should be worthy of an oscar nomination.

    For full review and more,–captain-phillips.html

  • “Any last advice? Stay alive.”

    The Hunger Games: Catching Fire proved not only to be a financial goliath raking in a record-breaking $110 million Thanksgiving haul, but raised a relevant question—when was the last time a sequel was this good?

    As a movie sequel, Catching Fire proves to have as much punch (if not more) than The Hunger Games. The next chapter in the sci-fi young adult franchise delivers a broader and more layered reality of Panem jumping deeper into the darker territory of a tightly woven, government-controlled civilization bound to their gladiator-inspired Hunger Games. Not only do we get a greater sense of the mental and physical prison victors Katniss (Jennifer Lawrence) and Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) exist in, but also the gravity of their defiance.

    Katniss Everdeen’s defiance has become a symbol of revolution among the fragmented 12 districts of Panem. Despite assuring President Snow that she is not a leader, the public image of Katniss is lauded—it becomes clear on the Victory Tour, a district-to-district tour publicly acknowledging the fallen victors of the previous Hunger Games, that pulling the plug on Katniss would launch her into martyrdom before wiping away the memory of her defiance. The media control of the districts becomes thin as impoverished residents peacefully (and violently) mark their discontent for the Capitol. During the end of the Victory Tour, President Snow announces a new decree for the 75th Hunger Games. The Quarter Quell will reap previous victors from each District in hopes to indirectly eliminate Katniss.

    Another jump back into the games makes you question if this movie will have more to offer than the first or if will feel like deja vu? With an impressive 8.2 score on IMDB and an 89% (out of 225 reviews) on Rotten Tomatoes, the sequel offers much more depth and dimension to chew on. Here are my highlights:
    – The Jennifer Lawrence Effect
    – Understanding Casting Choice–Josh Hutcherson
    – Effie Trinket — Character Development
    – Johanna Mason–Scene Stealer
    – The Games are Deadlier

    Overall, Catching Fire offers more strengths than what’s listed above, and it has proven to be one of the biggest surprises of 2013. Watch it!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *