The Hunger Games was an interesting movie mainly for what it promised. It was a fairly entertaining romp on its own, but it was saddled with the unenviable task of introducing all the intricacies of this particular world, setting the table for the political and social commentary yet to come. The Hunger Games: Catching Fire capitalizes on all that setup, delivering a tale of political maneuvering, symbols of defiance, and complex character struggles.
Katniss Everdeen and Peeta Mellark (Jennifer Lawrence and Josh Hutcherson), victors of the 74th Hunger Games, embark on a tour of the 12 districts of Panem. President Snow (Donald Sutherland) tasks the pair to pacify the populace by playing up their romance, but Katniss proves to be too strong a symbol of hope for the restless citizens. Snow, taking advice from the new master of games, sets out to crush any hopes of rebellion with a special edition of the Hunger Games, where all the tributes will be former victors. Katniss and Peeta are thrust back into the deadly arena, and have to fight for their lives one more time.
As it was with the first movie, the titular games are actually the least interesting part of this story. The film builds a world on the edge of outright revolution, with the main character an unwilling participant in what is turning out to be a movement built around her actions. The movie gains much from simple talk about Katniss’ role in the revolution, and the capital’s various strategies for dealing with that perception. This film benefits from having its focus shifted away from the games. There are much larger things at play, and Katniss’ decisions gain greater significance than just her immediate survival.
There are still elements of the film that prove to be really clunky, however. The film’s central love triangle remains pretty bland. There isn’t any real distinction between Katniss’ choices, her two paramours essentially the same noble character with differing heights. Josh Hutcherson and Liam Hemsworth are certainly trying, but the characters lack definition. But the film largely improves on everything else. Director Francis Lawrence shoots the film with a much steadier hand, eschewing the forced kineticism of the last edition. But the film still ends up moving more quickly thanks to clever editing. Aside from the perfunctory romantic tribulations, this story is told with hardly any fat.
Jennifer Lawrence’s commanding presence gives the film an appealing center. Her lines are simple, but she imbues them with a kind of weariness that defies her age. But things get even more entertaining as it spins out from the center. You get a terrific performance from Woody Harrelson, who measures the character’s obvious disdain for everything with political savvy. And there’s Donald Sutherland, whose sinister turn still somehow manages to come off as warm and human. Once again, Stanley Tucci and Lenny Kravitz play opposite ends of the spectrum, and both manage to be thoroughly compelling.
The Hunger Games: Catching Fire draws an easy comparison to The Empire Strikes Back. It’s a middle chapter with an uneasy conclusion that still manages to improve on almost every aspect of the prior chapter. It feels like a real payoff, with all the intriguing things only teased at in the first chapter all coming into clear focus. The plot as a whole still does sometimes come off as a bit mechanical, caving to the demands of the genre from which it stemmed. But as a whole, this is a really well-put-together film that promises even more.
My Rating:
