Time to review that long-awaited sequel…
I’ve had a middling relationship with the Hunger Games movies. The first one made a whole bunch of unnecessary changes, each of which felt like they were missing the point. Catching Fire basically got everything right from the book, or nearly. And Mockingjay Part 1 took what I remember as a whole bunch of nothing in the book and…well, there still wasn’t too much going on in the way of events, but that gave them some time to spend on Katniss dealing with trauma.
How many colons can I cram into the review title? The third movie in the Hunger Games series is out (from the first half of the third book, Mockingjay), and once again I enjoyed it. A fair number of people seem to be unhappy with the “part-1-ness” of it, but though it may be a transitional episode it did not just feel like a prologue for the next movie. Indeed, since it’s the first movie not centered around the titular Hunger Games, it feels more original than Catching Fire.
In short, this movie won’t make sense unless you’ve seen The Hunger Games: Catching Fire, which itself required at least some knowledge (book or movie) of the original Hunger Games. It’s not a great work of art, so if you haven’t watched any of the series don’t worry about missing this one, but it’s a reasonable progression of “what happens next” in both a war of information1 and Katniss’s repeated exposure to multiple traumas. Recommendation: if you’ve kept up so far, go see it.
The rest of this post will just be rambling about various things. Spoilers ahoy.
I couldn’t review the last Hunger Games movie because my opinion wasn’t so clear, and I couldn’t answer the central question of “who should see this movie?”. The sequel, The Hunger Games: Catching Fire, was a lot less frustrating personally in terms of deviation from the book; there were only one or two major grievances I had with the movie. I enjoyed it.
So this time, the entire “review” will be about whether or not you should watch this movie.