Directed by:
Francis LawrenceCinematography:
Jo WillemsComposer:
James Newton HowardCast:
Jennifer Lawrence, Josh Hutcherson, Liam Hemsworth, Woody Harrelson, Elizabeth Banks, Julianne Moore, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Stanley Tucci (more)Plots(1)
Jennifer Lawrence reprises her role as Katniss Everdeen in the third instalment of the sci-fi film series based on the novels by Suzanne Collins. In the aftermath of the 75th Hunger Games, Katniss finds herself in the underground District 13, struggling to adjust to her new life and role as the 'Mockingjay' in the rebellion against the Capitol and tyrannical ruler President Snow (Donald Sutherland). Meanwhile, her friend and fellow Games victor Peeta Mellark (Josh Hutcherson) is in the hands of the Capitol, where he is tortured and brainwashed. Katniss soon realises that to save the ones she loves she will have to join the revolt, led by President Coin (Julianne Moore), and become a symbol of hope for the rebels. With help from her friends and allies, including Gale Hawthorne (Liam Hemsworth), Haymitch Abernathy (Woody Harrelson), Effie Trinket (Elizabeth Banks) and Plutarch Heavensbee (Philip Seymour Hoffman), Katniss sets out to bring down the Capitol and President Snow once and for all. (Lionsgate Home Entertainment)
(more)Videos (28)
Reviews (14)
Worse than the second film. Verbose, with very little action, and unnecessarily political. And there was all this fuss about it, even the new song by Lorde turned out to be unnecessary. It is incomprehensible how Jennifer Lawrence, compared to the excellently coherent and well-paced second installment, stumbled so badly and made a typically arrogant and tearful Hollywood shlock that lacks all the ingredients that made the second film a better one. A leap back to mediocrity with one single inventive moment – the chimney falling on the building.
()
I was going into the third Hunger Games movie with respect. I might have even been a little bit afraid. The first one had a premise that was really enjoyable. The second one had a combination of an arena fighting and politics, which enthused me far less, and after watching it, it was clear that the third one would be pure war and politics, which is something I was afraid of. But in the end, it wasn’t that bad. There was politics, but it was bearable. An array of amazing action scenes often came to the rescue, as well as the actors who obviously enjoyed it immensely. Especially Moore and Hoffman whose roles I’ll never forget. I must even admit that even though this movie had a lot of flaws, I’m excited to see the final instalment.
()
I'd probably be repeating myself if I said that splitting last parts into two or more episodes is more detrimental to the film itself, and the only upside is the producers' and distributors' pockets are more lined. The same is true of the first episode of the third part of Hunger Games installment. All things considered, nothing much happens. While there are a lot of action scenes, it all feels kind of incomplete. Personally, I liked the third book the least, so I wasn't expecting anything special. In short, I would love to punch the face of whoever came up with the idea of splitting “Mockingjay” into two movies (the last Harry Potter at least had a lot to draw from, but with HG, the books aren't that extensive).
()
It's not smarter than the previous parts in the series, just more talkative. It's not even fun. The story has disappeared, and the development of Katniss and Peeta's relationship, which held the first and second parts above water, is sidelined. I've never been a fan of Panem's world, and I really don't have anything to lean on here. Overall impression: 25%. It seems to me that the whole series mentally corresponds to the world of 12-16-year-old teenagers, and it is questionable whether this stretched filler can satisfy them...
()
The first half of the last episode of The Hunger Games offers nothing but constant talking, preparation for the revolution, gathering courage and calm before the storm. Meanwhile, we will have to wait a year for a proper civil war and action before the second half premieres. Actually, it's more of a prequel. From a technical perspective, the film is not badly shot, the actors are very good and the dialogues are quite fine, but it is desperately boring and lacks action. Most of the time, you just wait for something to finally start happening, but you won't get see it, because the creators are saving it for the next film. In addition, the whole thing looks much cheaper than the previous two films. If nothing else, in the previous Hunger Games you could at least enjoy the grandeur of the gaming arena, the digital tricks, or at least the extravagant color stylization of the capital and its inhabitants. This is not the case with The Hunger Games: Mockingjay, as most of the story takes place in an underground bunker or in ruins, so the film is not only much more intimate, but also not very visually attractive. For the average viewer, or one who hasn’t seen the previous episodes, this is a waste of time. For fans of the series, the film only serves as a moving illustration of events that they already know from the book. And, of course, it doesn't make sense to tell them that the new Hunger Games is not worth it...
()
Ads