Reviews

(SORT OF SPOILERS...but not really)

50 Minutes of 65mm IMAX. The director who introduced the world to serious Will Smith (or re-introduced). And the hottest, most-wanted, A- List actress. And yet...

...you can't help but yawn. More than once, unfortunately.

"The Hunger Games: Catching Fire" opens months after the "The Hunger Games" (an awful excuse of an ode to Suzanne Collins masterpiece, even though she was heavily involved with production) as we find Katniss Everdeen suffering from extreme moments of PTSD. We watch her endure the fake, Capitol induced life and the desire for the simplicity of that in District 12.

The opening of the film is strong. Actually- almost near-perfect. Much darker and more visually attractive, these sparse moments give you a feeling that the film could actually live up to everything it should be. Francis Lawrence ("I Am Legend", "Constantine", "Water for Elephants") works hard to undo previous director Gary Ross' established bland visuals, and succeeds. But the cinematography can't save the shaky dialogue and pacing.

Watching Katniss and Peeta's struggle through the tour is beautiful. It really is. And the revelation of the Quarter Quell plays out exactly as you hope. It's after the emotional tension releases that we're left with a boring shell of a film. The acting breaks (even J. Lawrence's..sometimes), the pacing seems as though the writers gave up, and the visual effects...well, it's nice to see that the VFX artists from 1980 wanted to keep the same continuity between the horrid attempts in this film and the awfulness of the first one.

But, it makes a comeback...sort of. As soon as the Quell starts- BAM. You're back in it. The charming use of 65mm IMAX is a nice touch, but immediately reminds you, "oh yeah- I'm NOT watching 'The Dark Knight Rises'...I should probably re-watch that". Hawai'i is shown off beautifully, the VFX, again, are not. And the pacing feels rushed. Then slows back down. And then speeds back up. And then slows...and never finds it's balance again.

"The Hunger Games: Catching Fire" reminds me a little bit of when I first watched Christopher Nolan's "The Prestige". I was left with that "wait...what?!" feeling. The difference, however, is that "The Prestige" is supposed to feel like that. You want to watch it over and over. Films should be like that. Instead, "Catching Fire" leaves you feeling that you just want to move on. It can't find that perfect balance between beautiful, tragic, and slow; intense, bloody and fast.

It's an improvement from the first film, this is true. However, is it a great film? No. It is a film that has a beautiful opening and a perfect introduction into Francis Lawrence's interpretation of Collin's novel, that falls apart with dead pacing and laughable dialogue.

"Catching Fire" is forgettable (not box office-wise, obviously). But, hopefully, "Mockingjay" (slated to be a two-parter released within the next 2-3 years) will finally be The Hunger Games that the book establishes.

Third/Fourth times a charm, guys.

As many people have pointed out, this films story, premise, writing, and characters are completely and totally unbelievable and impossible. Good job, pat yourself on the back for figuring that out-yes, this film is impossible and unbelievable, thankfully.

When Alien was released 33 years ago, it was something that nobody had seen before. It was well directed, suspenseful, and with the perfect amount of gore to contrast the "Holy Flip!" moments- and it all holds up beautifully . As a suspense/horror film, it changed the game. As a benchmark moment in cinema, it joined the ranks of Star Wars and The Godfather, and would be known as one of the greatest horror films of all time.

And then came this little gem. With Scott involved and the words "Sci- fi" "horror", and that alien siren scream in the trailer (not to mention an R rating) it seemed as though this was Sir Ridleys comeback, and for me it was. But to make it even better, good ol' Damon Lindelof was penning the project. As a huge LOST and Sci-fi fan this was a perfect duo.

After hyping the film up for myself and those around me for 4+ months, it was much more than expected. It was exactly what I wanted from a Scott-Free Production, and a Lindelof script. Sure, the character development wasn't perfect-but it didn't need to be. The story was exponentially intriguing, and left me (and the rest of the audience) asking the questions that had been introduced in the film. And who else would you want to ask those questions, then the master of questions himself, Damon Lindelof.

Many will argue that it was stupid and poorly executed, and nothing like Alien. But have we forgotten WHY we all loved Alien? Because we were spellbound by it. Because it would never happen. Because we go to the cinema to be taken to worlds and places that can never exist except for in films and other types of storytelling mediums. And when that Prometheus landed, and when she gave herself a flipping C-SECTION, and when that black tipped deacon bursted out at the end, I was spellbound. Most of us go to be entertained, while the others go to be moved both emotionally and spiritually.

And if you went into it expecting a direct Alien prequel, well obviously you were wrong. But, seriously do we WANT another Alien related film? Or one more closely connected to Alien than Prometheus? Have we not learned our lesson with the last two Alien films and then the AVP series. No, Damon and Ridley took this in a much better and thoughtful direction, and I can't wait for the sequel.

And while some might not have felt what I or anyone else that have liked or loved the film felt, how can you not be thoroughly entertained by a crew of scientists landing on a desolate planet and finding out it wasn't what they thought it was. If you think about it that's exactly what the premise for Alien was, with the exact same ending...only plus one android.

Essentially, lovers, love it. Haters, be quiet.