‘Mockingjay’ weakest of ‘Games’

Liam Hemsworth and Jennifer Lawrence go over the damage to District 8 during a secret visit. (Photo courtesy of Lionsgate)

Written by Roger Thomas

Before the original “Hunger Games” movie arrived in theaters, I had read the first novel upon which the film was based.

I liked the book overall but I have never been a big fan of stories written in the first person point of view. I actually thought the first film benefitted greatly by having scenes where Katniss was not present. What President Snow and others were thinking was very revealing to the overall story.

Reviews of the Past: “The Hunger Games”

When the second film arrived, I had not read the next novel, but I went into the theater a little underwhelmed by the fact Katniss and Peeta were returning to the arena of the games. Could the author not come up with something more creative than a replay of the first story? It turned out that I was pleasantly surprised. The second film is almost as good as the first, and in some ways even surpasses it.

Reviews of the Past: “The Hunger Games: Catching Fire”

And now we have the third, “Mockingjay.” This one is based on the first half of the third novel, with the other half arriving in the summer of 2015.

My immediate reaction to the third film can be summed up in two sentences. First, this film drops you right into the story with not one moment of reflection of what has already passed. I would not recommend this film to anyone who has not seen the first two. Personally, I wish I had gone back and watched the others one more time before going to see this one.

My second immediate reaction is that the film takes some time, a full 40 minutes, before there is anything on the screen that is actually moving and emotional. There is a lot of talk, which can be slightly confusing; there is a journey to District 12 that is very uneventful and then more discussions. Again, I found none of this compelling.

There is a reunion of most of the characters from the previous films. Gale (Liam Hemsworth) finally gets to do something. Peeta is seen mostly in a broadcast from the Capital. President Snow is as smarmy as ever. Haymitch is now sober (a point the other characters keep repeating.)

Get Tickets

Fandango.com                    AMC Theatres                   MovieTickets.com

Julianne Moore is the president of the rebels in District 13, a brilliant actress who I hope has a juicier role in the next film. Mahershala Ali’s new character of Boggs is an interesting addition.

Overall, the characters are all here to affect the life of Katniss. If you enjoyed them before, you should expect much of the same.

Then finally, as the second third of the movie begins, there is a very powerful scene in a refugee hospital. Some of this has been playing in the trailer for months, but it still works remarkably well. All that happens in that outing lifts the film to a height it has not achieved prior to these moments. However, I did find myself wondering why President Snow had security cameras in this district but not in District 12, the home of Katniss.

Following the scene at the hospital and the events that came next, the film has some good moments and others that slow things down considerably. The overall film is a mixed bag of highs and lows, with the low points more numerous, but the high points – like the climax – almost rescue the film completely.

This is the weakest of the three “Hunger Games” films, but there is still enough to recommend it slightly. Besides, one probably needs to see the film to understand the finale, and that alone is reason enough to view this one.

I certainly hope that “Mockingjay Part 2” is closer to the first two films than this recent chapter. And ultimately may the series be greater as a whole than this third chapter is alone.

From ComingSoon.net

STUDIO: Lionsgate

DIRECTOR: Francis Lawrence

MPAA RATING: PG-13 (for intense sequences of violence and action, some disturbing images and thematic material)

SCREENWRITERS: Danny Strong, Peter Craig

STARRING: Donald Sutherland, Woody Harrelson, Jeffrey Wright, Josh Hutcherson, Jena Malone, Julianne Moore,Stanley Tucci, Elizabeth Banks, Philip Seymour Hoffman,Jennifer Lawrence, Sam Claflin, Liam Hemsworth

GENRE: Drama, Action, Sci-Fi

Reviews of the Past: ‘The Hunger Games’

The next set of reviews we’ll be publishing are some of the ones Roger Thomas has done exclusively for The Stanly News & Press. Roger has written movie reviews for The Stanly News & Press and other outlets for years, long before starting this blog. So we decided it would be good to give readers a sample of his previous work, in addition to posts of reviews of current films. Other reviews will run daily.

Jennifer Lawrence and Josh Hutcherson

NOTE: Read Roger’s “Catching Fire” review here

Thursday: Roger’s review on “Mockingjay Part 1”

I read “The Hunger Games” novel at the encouragement of a friend and her daughter who both loved the book.

I had purchased the book over a year before and it sat on my shelf because other reading and many tasks came first. Over lunch one day I was challenged to take it down and enter the world of Katniss Everdeen. A challenge I embraced, and am glad of it.

By this point most already know that “Hunger Games” is a story of a future world where teenagers are forced by the government to participate in a match to the death. And as interesting as the game actually is, author Suzanne Collins also creates a captivating world where the elite live in the Capital and find great amusement in the game and the rest are forced to be suppliers of the Capital’s needs and the producers of the game’s participants.  Put another way, the “have nots” give up their most precious commodity so the “haves” can have their sport.

This past weekend the film version of “The Hunger Games” premiered to almost record box office success. It had the third largest opening weekend in history (behind “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2” and “The Dark Knight.”) Of course, success at the box office does not always mean a successful adaptation or a well-made film.

In this case “Games” is both a successful adaptation and a well-made film. In the former category the film succeeds in telling the novel’s story faithfully and emotionally. As is almost always the case, certain elements of the story are eliminated and others are enhanced, but for the most part, good choices were made by the screenwriters (a list which includes author Collins and director Gary Ross).

I would also applaud the screenplay for adding something not in the novel. The story in the book is all told in first person from the perspective of Katniss. The reader learns what she is thinking and feeling; there is never a question about her motivation and choices.

However, readers do not get a glimpse of what is happening elsewhere in the story. One of the strengths of the film is the several scenes where Katniss is not present. These aid the viewer in understanding exactly how and why the Hunger Games happen. As much as I enjoyed the book, these additions are one way the film outshines the text.

In the latter category of the film being well-made, there are many strengths. Gary Ross has only directed three films in his career and he has given the world two great films in the last fifteen years: “Pleasantville” and “Seabiscuit.” I am not ready to place “The Hunger Games” in the league as these two efforts, but it is certainly good enough to make one wish Ross would direct at least one film a year instead of three since 1998.

Other strengths of the film include beautiful cinematography (filmed in North Carolina), a engaging musical score by James Newton Howard (who may pick up his ninth Oscar nomination and perhaps his first win ever for his contribution in Games), and a large and engaging cast.  Not every actor in the film shines equally, and certainly none shine as bright as Jennifer Lawrence as Katniss, but there are a lot of juicy supporting roles with gifted actors giving their best.

One minor criticism is the use of handheld camera’s for several of the action sequences. This is a fad that has lasted too long. Shots with shaky cameras are a distraction not an enhancement to scene and often create confusion about what is actually transpiring on the screen. This is true not just of “Hunger Games,” but of many films of the last several years.

Finally, there are already articles stating “The Hunger Games” has religious meanings or political subtexts. Is it conservative or liberal symbolism? That is in the eye of the beholder.

But without a doubt, it is a well-made adaption of a very engaging book. And now it is time for me to follow the advice of my friend and her daughter and start reading the second novel, “Catching Fire.”

Box Office results

Domestic gross: $408,010,692

Foreign gross: $283,237,076

Production budget: $78 million

Opening weekend: $152,535,747

NOTE: Information from Boxofficemojo.com