veiledmusings.com

unravelling the thoughts of an emotional blockhead

The Good, The Bad, The Ugly: The Hunger Games: Catching Fire (2013)

In the company that I’m with right now, all employees have one day in every work week to the a half day off. I don’t usually take mine because I’m trying to save up for the holidays (and with this new day job, for some reason, free time equates to money wastage) but when I found out that Catching Fire was opening on the 21st, I plotted this week’s half day off to watch it.

And despite the slight mocking that I got from my boss (he didn’t like the first one), I still went out to catch the first screening in SM Aura – the nearest mall to our office.

So here’s the round up for Francis Lawrence’s interpretation of Suzanne Collins’ Catching Fire (Note that there may be spoilers; read at your own risk):

THE GOOD:

1. Josh Hutcherson’s ridiculously heart-melting and frustratingly sincere Peeta Mellark. No joke. I was reading the Hunger Games Wikipedia page earlier and I cannot, cannot, cannot believe that they even considered anybody else for the role. He personified that distinct Peeta quality where even though he’a laying it all out there like a door mat,it’s still somewhat dignified and not annoyingly pathetic.

2. The Awesome American Accents! Sam Claflin (The Pirates of the Carribean: On Stranger Tides) and Liam Hemsworth (The Last Song) to be more precise. The accents weren’t stiff and they weren’t pulling any faces when they were talking. It was totally legit.

3. Jennifer Lawrence’s Katniss Everdeen, of course. Duh. This girl always brings it when she’s on screen. There’re no holds barred when she’s acting. Refreshing because there’re only a handful of actresses out there working the same circuit that’re not afraid to look ugly.

4. The Fashion. They really upped in a couple of notches for this film – from the fierce (but ankle-breaking) shoes to the suits to the ridiculous make up – it was all very Capitol-shique. On some level it is pretty out there but still totally not that farfetched. Even the normal daywear looks like something that can be seen on runways a couple of years from now (read: I want that leather jacket with the awesome collar).

4. The Supporting Cast. There obviously were no scrimping out on the talent and star power. In addition to Stanley Tucci (Caesar Flickerman), Woody Harrelson (Haymitch Abernathy) and Donald Sutherland (President Snow), you have Sam Claflin (Finnick Odair), Jeffrey Wright (Beetee) and Philip freaking Seymour Hoffman (Plutarch Heavensbee). The scenes that have Plutarch and President Snow in them were my favorite- you just feel it and know instinctively that you’re in the midst of greatness. I think it’s because that they, being the great actors that they are, understand the motivation behind these characters; they know how these fictional people think and they drill down to the very logic that it ends up with everything being natural and organic. They made it worth my while even though they’re just playing characters off a ridiculous young adult novel.

* You’ll notice that those are all male actors. I’m still on the fence about Elizabeth Banks (Effie Trinket) and Jenna Malone (Johanna Mason). For some reason Effie was a bit over the top; kinda reminiscent of Christine Baranski in Chicago. You know that they know it’s a small role so they over compensate by overacting and swaggering across the screen as though the movie was about them. She did have her moments though; I got teary eyed during her goodbye scene. As for Jenna Malone, she just looked a bit too old for the role and it was sort of obvious that she was cast because hers is an already established name. I feel like there’s another actor out there who can bring out the character’s rage, instead of making it look like adolescent pouting.

THE BAD:

1. It was too freakin’ dark. Seriously, I couldn’t see what was happening half of the time in the arena.

2. Jennifer Lawrence’a cheek make up. I know that she has gorgeous cheekbones but the way they were highlighted was just wrong – sometimes it looked like she was the victim of a botched cheek implant procedure.

3. The fixation with the eyelashes. What’s up with that?

4. That feeling you get that it’s a movie that’s based on a book. I know, I know, it is a movie that’s based on a book. But this one felt like it was going through the paces. Comparing it to Gary Ross’ Hunger Games, that movie felt a lot more organic than this one and just generally flowed a lot better.

THE UGLY:

1. That whole thing with Gale. I don’t think that was in the book, was it? I remember Katniss being conflicted but in the movie they made it look like she’s already made a choice. For me it sort of removes a very big part of the Katniss-ness; her inability to make stout decision was a big part of the reason why you’ll hate her (and eventually love her when she freakin’ finally chooses). Didn’t work for me. The movie didn’t need anymore love angst, Peeta has that angle covered.

All in all it was a good movie and an even better sequel. Better than what I could’ve hoped for anyway. But there is still my disappointment that the helm wasn’t controlled by Gary Ross. I think he could’ve brought out more from the material because judging by how he handled last year’s Hunger Games, it’s obvious that he has an inherent understanding of the whole situation in the mythical Panem.

Verdict: 7.5/10. Worth watching but I sill miss Gary Ross. At least he wasn’t fixated on eyelashes.

The Good, The Bad, The Ugly: The Hunger Games: Catching Fire (2013)
The Good, The Bad, The Ugly: The Hunger Games: Catching Fire (2013)

0 thoughts on “The Good, The Bad, The Ugly: The Hunger Games: Catching Fire (2013)

Leave a Reply

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

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.