Film | Jennifer Lawrence | Josh Hutcherson | News | The Hunger Games

The New 'Hunger Games: Catching Fire' Trailer is Here: VIDEO


Chins up, smiles on. The continuing adventures of Katniss and Peeta, AFTER THE JUMP...

Premiered last night during the MTV Movie Awards. On its way in November.


Feed This post's comment feed


  1. Am I the only person on earth who didn't like the first movie? OK, the premise was interesting, so the setup in the first half hour was fine. But then it's like ninety minutes of running around in the woods, praying that they'd all die quickly so it would be over. Obviously, prayer failed yet again.

    Posted by: Brian | Apr 15, 2013 8:36:37 AM

  2. If you didn't read the book, the movie is hard to understand.

    Posted by: JoeDE | Apr 15, 2013 8:53:23 AM

  3. more hollywood schlock for the masses.... no wonder we americans are so dumB!

    Posted by: ctmany | Apr 15, 2013 9:08:45 AM

  4. I'm with Brian and JoeDE. The movie was an exercise in boredom. It appears that the screen adaptation missed several of the book's key points, and sort of hinted at them with hidden glances and unexplained actions. As for thrills, go watch "Battle Royale" for sort of mindless violence with almost the same premise. And, "Battle Royale"'s ending actually is interesting.

    Posted by: Continuum | Apr 15, 2013 9:14:52 AM

  5. ctmany, more cliches for the pseudo-intellectuals... it's all Hollywood's fault!

    Posted by: Mawm | Apr 15, 2013 9:14:53 AM

  6. Mawm, no, definitely not _all_ their fault....

    Posted by: ctmany | Apr 15, 2013 9:17:17 AM

  7. Aren't these movies for tweenaged girls? Why would grown adults go to see this?

    Posted by: Will | Apr 15, 2013 9:21:46 AM

  8. Well, you have to bring something to the table yourself. Having just watched THG for the second time I think it a better film than most critics appreciate. Ebert, for instance, bitched that it didn't spell out in A-B-C literalism a critique of economic injustice. If your audience were that stupid it would hardly be worth making a film.

    There are routine complaints about too much time on the paleo hunting and gathering aspects. Really? While an entire political party wants to strip away every social welfare program instituted since before the time of Dickesns? It is after all our real futture at this point, not an imaginary dystopia: "No arts; no letters; no society; and which is worst of all, continual fear, and danger of violent death: and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short."

    Posted by: melvin | Apr 15, 2013 10:03:28 AM

  9. read the books..........

    Posted by: steve | Apr 15, 2013 10:04:10 AM

  10. I've only read the first book, and I saw the movie; I enjoyed both. I'm looking forward to this one as well.

    Posted by: JT | Apr 15, 2013 10:09:02 AM

  11. Boring predictable passion-less movie.
    With a super-hot-looking young cast as it's Hollywood habit though.

    Posted by: George F | Apr 15, 2013 10:32:38 AM

  12. I haven't read the books but I liked the first movie. It's not great but it's certainly serviceable, though you get the feeling there are things left out, things that might explain the situation better.

    Jennifer Lawrence is fun to watch in interviews, particularly her appearances on David Letterman. She doesn't seem to have much of a filter between her brain and mouth and it makes her entertaining to watch, unlike most young actors. She's actually quite funny and Letterman seems almost smitten with her.

    It gets her in trouble occasionally, like when she told Ellen DeGeneres she'd nicknamed her cat "Chaz Bono" because she thought it was male at first but turned out to be female. The real Chaz Bono got his Y-fronts in a wad about it.

    Posted by: Caliban | Apr 15, 2013 11:12:22 AM

  13. @Brian,

    The first movie was a huge disappointment to me. So lacking what the book had. This second one looks to be more of the same.

    Posted by: Phoenix Justice | Apr 15, 2013 11:24:42 AM

  14. I think it's a pretty cool film. And I enjoyed the first one. The wigs alone have me excited. I guess that makes me a dumbed down pseudo-intellectual.

    I'll just have to give back my PhD.

    Or maybe I could point out instead that it's painfully clichéd and easy to make fun of the Hunger Games. And doing so doesn't make you clever or sophisticated. It's the equivalent of pointing out a missing apostrophe on a sign in a shop and thinking that makes you good at English.

    Just enjoy it for what it is ladies.

    Posted by: Betty Treacle | Apr 15, 2013 11:58:23 AM

  15. y'all should just be happy that this series is getting young people to think very critically about how "entertainment" is used to distract the masses from (socio)political corruption.

    and make no mistake - a great many young folks are talking about it.

    Posted by: Little Kiwi | Apr 15, 2013 12:05:25 PM

  16. Can't. Effin'. WAIT!

    Posted by: mike | Apr 15, 2013 2:02:22 PM

  17. Since i started this thread, I should clarify that I knew next to nothing about this movie, and I actually thought it was supposed to be sort of high brow/intellectual. So when I "bashed" the movie, I didn't mean it as a cliche putdown of popular entertainment, I really meant it as a putdown of a movie popular with the intelligentsia (which it apparently isn't). i thought it was supposed to be very different from the Twilight sort of thing, and in fact I'd say it was. Again, I liked the premise and backstory, and I got the obvious points it's making about contemporary society. I just really didn't get why I was watching some kids running around the forest for two hours. Seems like more time spent in the set up, and with the people watching the spectacle, would be more informative and entertaining. The forest stuff, it just went on and on and I couldn't see any point, political, artistic or otherwise. I did hear that the books were better, and maybe I'd appreciate it more had I read them.

    Posted by: Brian | Apr 15, 2013 2:04:52 PM

  18. Brian,
    Read the 3 THG books, then tell us what you think, I thoroughly enjoyed the books as there was so much more detail.

    Lots of people think Life of Pi was all that AND a bag of chips, I didn't read the book so I was lost at the movie, I still don't care for that movie, whether it won awards or not.

    We are all entitled to our opinions, even those who disagree with us.

    Posted by: jsb | Apr 15, 2013 7:17:30 PM

  19. All movies based on books are dumbed down versions, made for mass consumption.

    Posted by: Donald | Apr 16, 2013 8:26:45 AM

Post a comment


« «MTV Movie Award Winners and Opening Clip: FULL LIST, VIDEO« «